Robust Backstepping Control Applied to UAVs for Pest Recognition in Maize Crops
, Alejandro Benítez-Morales *,†, Omar-Jacobo Santos-Sánchez *,†, Orlando García-Pérez †, Hugo Romero-Trejo †, Mario-Oscar Ordaz-Oliver † and Jesús-Patricio Ordaz-OliverRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper discusses on the robust backstepping controller design for UAV system. A normal/classical backstepping approach was used in designing such controller.
1. Please include other type of controllers as well in the background study and provide a reason on why selecting backstepping approach.
2. The method used in this paper is rather standard in the framework of backstepping control design. Please highlight the novelty of the proposed approach than existing ones.
3. Four controllers were introduced in this work. Are they able to work well when all the angle, yaw and sub domain theta and y needs to be controlled simultaneously? Please confirm this. Otherwise it will be not practical to be implemented.
4. On the results, please show the comparison with the PD results. This will confirm the effectiveness of the proposed approach.
5. How the final part (image processing) is related to the proposed robust backstepping approach? or this part is totally different in context? if yes then you really need to highlight the novelty of the proposed approach as it looks a standard approach one.
6. Please improve your conlclusion by highlighting the main results/outcome and future work.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper investigates the design of a robust control scheme based on the Lyapunov approach and the backstepping method. Overall, the paper is well organized and easy to read. The experimental study consolidated the theoretical analysis. I appreciate this contribution. However, some suggestions to improve the scientific quality of the paper:
- The second assumption in page 2 is not clear (Line 132). How can authors ensure that? Proof of theorem 1 is based on the validity of this assumption!
- Assumption 3: How reliable is this assumption in practice? Please comment on that.
- Assumption 5 (line 169), needs more justification and details. Please provide more comments and analysis for the stated specifications.
- What is delta_1 after eq(12)?
- How can authors validate assumption 2 for system eq(14)?
- Please provide an indication regarding the control efforts for the designed control and the PD control.
- No future works and auto-critics showing some drawbacks of the designed approach!
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the revised version and I am now satisfied with the work.
Reviewer 2 Report
My comments are fully addressed. I recommend the acceptance of the paper for publication.
