mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Autopilot-Preserving Residual Q-Learning with HJB-Inspired Finite-Action Risk Filtering for Fixed-Wing UAV Command Supervision

arXiv 2606.01397 ↗First posted 31 May 2026cs.RO cs.LG cs.SYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A fixed-wing UAV must hold airspeed, altitude, and heading references under wind, gusts, and turbulence, channels coupled so that correcting one can degrade another. Classical autopilots stabilize the airframe well but adapt poorly when a hard crosswind meets an aggressive turn, while reinforcement-learning (RL) policies acting directly on the surfaces concentrate exploration risk at the actuator interface. We place a learned supervisor above an unchanged autopilot rather than inside it: it selects a residual from a finite, bounded action set on the commanded airspeed, altitude, and heading; the modified reference is projected into an admissible command envelope before reaching the autopilot, which stays the only actuator-facing controller. What is new is how the residual is chosen. HJB residual scores candidates with a semi-discrete value-iteration critic in the spirit of the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation, ranks them by a no-op-relative Hamiltonian advantage, and filters them through a control-Lyapunov- and control-barrier-inspired finite-action shield that always keeps a no-op fallback. On a shared 12-state runtime holding the plant, autopilot, and actuator model fixed, so the comparison is at the package level, HJB residual lowers mean RMS path-tracking error to 44.809 m, against 338.617 m for the baseline autopilot and 88.809 m for a tabular-Q residual, an 86.77% reduction over the baseline and 49.54% over Q-learning. The gain concentrates where the baseline fails worst and comes with a measured rise in airspeed error, so no method dominates every metric. We present this autopilot-preserving residual command-supervision design and benchmark with its trade-offs reported intact.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 May 2026.

Builds on

7 of 35 references.

References · 7

  1. 2016Control Barrier Function Based Quadratic Programs for Safety Critical Systemscited by 261
  2. 2018Residual Reinforcement Learning for Robot Controlcited by 242
  3. 2023Hyperparameters in Reinforcement Learning and How To Tune Themcited by 58
  4. 2019HJB Optimal Feedback Control with Deep Differential Value Functions and Action Constraintscited by 8
  5. 2020Approximate Optimal Control for Safety-Critical Systems with Control Barrier Functionscited by 6
  6. 2024A Safe Reinforcement Learning Algorithm for Supervisory Control of Power Plantscited by 3
  7. 2021Online Algorithms and Policies Using Adaptive and Machine Learning Approachescited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.