REVIEW PAPER
Machine learning for estimation of dynamic model parameters of autonomous underwater vehicles: a re-viewfor 2015-2025 period
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Electronic and Automation, Hereke Asım Kocabıyık Vocational High School, Turkey
 
 
Submission date: 2025-12-19
 
 
Final revision date: 2026-04-05
 
 
Acceptance date: 2026-04-26
 
 
Publication date: 2026-06-05
 
 
Corresponding author
Gulten YILMAZ   

Electronic and Automation, Hereke Asım Kocabıyık Vocational High School, Agah Ateş St., +90, Kocaeli, Turkey
 
 
Acta Mechanica et Automatica 2026;20(2):343-354
 
HIGHLIGHTS
  • Reviewed ML methods for AUV parameter estimation covering the 2015-2025 period
  • Compared ANN, SVR, MOGP, PINN, and RNN for AUV dynamic modeling
  • ML-based methods show superior noise robustness and data efficiency
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The operational capability of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) depends on the precise modeling of their dynamic beha-viors under environmental disturbances. Traditionally, model parameter estimation processes—conducted through tank tests, empirical cal-culations, and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analyses—are giving way to data-driven approaches due to high costs, intensive com-putational loads, and real-time adaptation constraints. This study systematically reviews the machine learning (ML) techniques developed for estimating AUV dynamic model parameters over the ten-year period from 2015 to 2025. Within the scope of this review, classical methods such as Support Vector Regression (SVR), Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), and Multi-Output Gaussian Processes (MOGP) are examined alongside Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINN), which integrate physical laws into the learning process, and Explainable Artificial In-telligence (XAI) approaches that ensure model transparency. Furthermore, LSTM and Transformer architectures, which model the temporal dependencies of AUV motions, and Reinforcement Learning (RL) based online adaptation strategies are analyzed. The reviewed methods are presented comparatively in terms of data requirements, computational complexity, physical consistency, and validation strategies. This review serves as a guide for researchers in the field of underwater robotics, highlighting the current state and future research directions of modern machine learning paradigms in AUV system identification processes.
REFERENCES (80)
1.
Hassani V, Surensen A.J. Pascoal A.M. Athans M. Robust Dynamic Positioning of Offshore Vessels Using Mixed-
 
2.
Simetti E, Wanderlingh F, Torelli S, Bibuli M, Odetti A, Bruzzone G, Rizzini DL, Aleotti J, Palli G, Moriello L, Scarcia, U. Autonomous Underwater İntervention: Experimental Results of The MARIS Project. IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 2018; 43 (3): 620–639.
 
3.
Zereik E, Bibuli M, Miskovic N, Ridao P, Pascoal A. Challenges and future trends in marine robotics. Annu Rev Control. 2018;46:350–368.
 
4.
Zhang Q, Zhang J, Chemori A, Xiang X. Virtual submerged floating operational system for robotic manipulation. Complexity. 2018;9528313. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9....
 
5.
Qin H, Chen H, Sun Y, Chen L. Distributed finite-time fault-tolerant containment control for multiple ocean bottom flying node systems with error constraints. Ocean Eng. 2019;189:106341.
 
6.
Xiang X, Yu C, Lapierre L, Zhang J, Zhang Q. Survey on fuzzy-logic-based guidance and control of marine surface vehicles and underwater vehicles. Int J Fuzzy Syst. 2018;20(2):572–586.
 
7.
Peng Z, Wang J, Wang D, Han QL. An overview of recent advances in coordinated control of multiple autonomous surface vehicles. IEEE Trans Ind Inform. 2021;17(2):732–745.
 
8.
Qin H, Li C, Sun Y, Li X, Du Y, Deng Z. Finite-time trajectory tracking control of unmanned surface vessel with error constraints and input saturations. J Franklin Inst. 2020;357(16):11472–11495.
 
9.
Karimi HR, Lu Y. Guidance and control methodologies for marine vehicles: A survey. Control Eng Pract. 2021;111:104785.
 
10.
Wang Z, Yang S, Xiang X, Vasilijevic A, Miskovic N, Nad D. Cloud-based mission control of USV fleet: Architecture, implementation and experiments. Control Eng Pract. 2021;106:104657.
 
11.
Gu N, Wang D, Peng Z, Wang J, Han QL. Advances in line-of-sight guidance for path following of autonomous marine vehicles: An overview. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst. 2022;1–17.
 
12.
Zhang J, Xiang X, Zhang Q, Li W. Neural network-based adaptive trajectory tracking control of underactuated AUVs with unknown asymmetrical actuator saturation and unknown dynamics. Ocean Eng. 2020;218:108193.
 
14.
Ton A, Lee M, Vos S, Gawehn M, den Heijer K, Aarninkhof S. Beach and nearshore monitoring techniques. In: Sandy Beach Morphodynamics. Elsevier; 2020; 659–687.
 
15.
Fossen TI. Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles. New York. USA. Wiley; 1994.
 
16.
Dinc M, Hajiyev C. Integrated navigation system applied to dynamic modeling of Autonomous Underwater Vehicle. In: Proc 19th Saint Petersburg Int Conf Integrated Navigation Systems (ICINS). 2012; 272–278.
 
17.
Wang J, Wang C, Wei Y, Zhang C. Command filter based adaptive neural trajectory tracking control of an underactuated underwater vehicle in three-dimensional space. Ocean Eng. 2019;180:175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocea....
 
18.
Lima GS, Lizárraga F, Alam M, Poignet P. Sliding mode control with Gaussian process regression for underwater robotic vehicles. Int J Adv Rob Syst. 2020;17(5):1–12.
 
19.
Imam F, Musilek P, Reformat MZ. Parametric and nonparametric machine learning techniques for increasing power system reliability: A review. Information. 2024;15(1):37.https://doi.org/10.3390/info15....
 
20.
Zhao J. Neural network predictive control for autonomous underwater vehicle with input delay. J Control Sci Eng. 2018;2018:2316957.
 
21.
Elhaki O, Shojaei K. Neural network-based target tracking control of underactuated autonomous underwater vehicles with a prescribed performance. Ocean Eng. 2018;167:239–256.
 
22.
Shojaei K. Neural network feedback linearization target tracking control of underactuated autonomous underwater vehicles with a guaranteed performance. Ocean Eng. 2022;258:111827.
 
23.
Park BS. Neural network-based tracking control of underactuated autonomous underwater vehicles with model uncertainties. J Dyn Syst Meas Control. 2015;137(2):021004.
 
24.
Ertogan M. Modelling using neural networks and dynamic position control for AUVs. Journal of ETA Maritime Science. 2024;12(1):64-73.
 
25.
Wang B, Huang L, Liu J, Deng Z, Fu M. A support vector regression-based integrated navigation method for underwater vehicles. IEEE Sens J. 2020;20(15):8875–8883.
 
26.
Thanh PNN, Anh HPH. Neural network-based depth and horizontal control for autonomous underwater vehicles with prescribed performance. Ocean Eng. 2023;281:114647.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocea....
 
27.
Wehbe B, Krell MM. Learning coupled dynamic models of underwater vehicles using support vector regression. In: OCEANS 2017 - Aberdeen. 2017; 1–7.
 
28.
Liu T, Smith J, et al. A Gaussian-process-based model predictive control for autonomous underwater vehicles. J Mar Sci Eng. 2024;12(4):676.
 
29.
Liu W, Xu J, Li L, Zhang K, Zhang H. Adaptive model predictive control for underwater manipulators using Gaussian process regression. J Mar Sci Eng. 2023;11(9):1641.
 
30.
Ahmed F, Xiang XB, Jiang CC, Xiang G, Yang SL. Survey on traditional and AI based estimation techniques for hydrodynamic coefficients of autonomous underwater vehicle. Ocean Eng. 2023;268:113300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocea....
 
31.
Ramirez WA, Kocijan J, Leong Z, Nguyen H, Jayasinghe SG. Dynamic system identification of underwater vehicles using multi-output Gaussian processes. Int J Autom Comput. 2021;18(5):681–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633....
 
32.
He Y, Zhao Y, Xu G, Deng X. Gaussian process based robust trajectory tracking of autonomous underwater vehicle. In: 2021 China Automation Congress (CAC). 2021; 2862–2867.
 
33.
Thompson R. Probabilistic modeling of underwater currents using MOGP. IEEE J Ocean Eng. 2023;48(2):312–325.
 
34.
Chen H et al. Quantitative comparison of MOGP and BNN in underwater navigation. Mar Struct. 2022;84:103215.
 
35.
Chen Z, Liu P. PINN-AUV: a physics-informed approach for estimating hydrodynamic parameters. Mar Struct. 2024;92:103–118.
 
36.
Raissi M et al. Physics-informed neural networks: a deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. J Comput Phys. 2019;378:686–707.
 
37.
Raissi M. Stiffness issues in training physics-informed neural networks. J Comput Phys. 2021;420:109–125.
 
38.
Sun H et al. Adaptive sampling strategies for PINNs in underwater hydrodynamics. Neurocomputing. 2024;580:127–142.
 
39.
Martinez J et al. Deep reinforcement learning for real-time hydrodynamic parameter identification. Robot Auton Syst. 2024;162:104–119.
 
40.
Chu F, Li H, Xie L, Zhao J. A survey of transformer architectures for autonomous driving. Expert Syst Appl. 2026;299:130338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa....
 
41.
Smith A, Taylor B. Interpretability of machine learning models in marine robotics: an XAI approach. Artif Intell Rev. 2024;57(2):45–67.
 
42.
Fossen TI. Handbook of marine craft hydrodynamics and motion control. 2nd ed. Hoboken. NJ USA: Wiley; 2021.
 
43.
Lin L, Chen Y, Xiong H, Yu C, Zhu H, Xing Y, Zheng G. Hydrodynamics model identification and model-based control application of a new type of AUV. J Mar Sci Eng. 2025;13(2):310.
 
44.
Wehbe B, Fabisch A, Krell MM. Online model identification for underwater vehicles through incremental support vector regression. In: 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). 2017; 4173–4180.
 
45.
Xu F, Zou ZJ, Yin JC, Cao J. Identification modeling of underwater vehicles' nonlinear dynamics based on support vector machines. Ocean Eng. 2013;67:68–76.
 
46.
Zhu M, Wen Y, Sun W, Wu B. A novel adaptive weighted least square support vector regression algorithm-based identification of the ship dynamic model. IEEE Access. 2019;7:128910–128924.
 
47.
Macatangay X, Gabriel SA, Hoseinnezhad R, Fowler A, Bab-Hadiashar A. Machine learning for modeling underwater vehicle dynamics: overview and insights. IEEE Access. 2024;12:139486–139504.
 
48.
Vasudev KL, Pandey M, Pu JH. A comparative study on hydrodynamic optimization approaches for AUV design using CFD. Fluid Dyn Mater Process. 2025;21(7):1545.
 
49.
Wehbe B, Krell MM. Learning coupled dynamic models of underwater vehicles using support vector regression. In: Oceans 2017-Aberdeen. IEEE. 2017; 1–7.
 
50.
Li C, Guo S. Characteristic evaluation via multi-sensor information fusion strategy for spherical underwater robots. Inf Fusion. 2023;95:199–214.
 
51.
Demiroglu Y, Kaya BB. A system identification study of an autonomous underwater vehicle by using multi-fidelity surrogate modeling. Science and Technology Organization (STO). 2023; 1-17.
 
52.
Luo W, Guo X, Dai J, Rao T. Hull optimization of an underwater vehicle based on dynamic surrogate model. Ocean Eng. 2021;230:109050.
 
53.
Abdessemed F. SVM-based control system for a robot manipulator. Int J Adv Rob Syst. 2012;9(6):247.
 
54.
Schmidhuber J. Deep learning in neural networks: An overview. Neural Netw. 2015;61:85–117.
 
55.
Yan J, Yang X, Zhao H, Luo X, Guan X. Autonomous underwater vehicles: Localization, tracking, and formation. Cham: Springer Nature; 2021.
 
56.
Yari E, Ayoobi A, Ghassemi H. Applying the artificial neural network to estimate the drag force for an autonomous underwater vehicle. Open J Fluid Dyn. 2015;4:334–46.https://doi.org/10.4236/ojfd.2....
 
57.
Islam M, Mills J, Gash R, Pearson W. A literature survey of broken ice-structure interaction modelling methods for ships and offshore platforms. Ocean Eng. 2021;221:108527.
 
58.
Song YS, Arshad MR. Thruster modeling for a hovering autonomous underwater vehicle considering thruster-thruster and thruster-hull interaction. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Underwater System Technology: Theory and Applications (USYS). 2016; 100–4.
 
59.
Kim S, Kim J. Neural-network-based adaptive control for trajectory tracking of AUVs with model uncertainties. J Mar Sci Technol. 2023;28(3):415–428.
 
60.
Qiao L, Zhang R. Transfer learning for hydrodynamic parameter estimation of AUVs: a deep learning approach. Appl Ocean Res. 2024;142:103820.
 
61.
Ramirez WA. Gaussian processes applied to system identification, navigation and control of underwater vehicles [dissertation]. Hobart. TAS. Australia: University of Tasmania; 2019.
 
62.
Zhang Z, Xu L, Duan X, Bai L. Non-parametric dynamics modeling for autonomous underwater vehicle using Gaussian process learning network. In: 2025 44th Chinese Control Conference (CCC). 2025; 1373–9.
 
63.
Hong Z, Wang X, Li M, Gu Y, Zhao J, Cao X. Identification of USV maneuvering model based on multi-output Gaussian process regression. In: 2023 China Automation Congress (CAC). 2023; 6300–5.
 
64.
Ramirez WA, Kocijan J, Leong ZQ, Nguyen HD, Jayasinghe SG. Dynamic system identification of underwater vehicles using multi-output Gaussian processes. Int J Autom Comput. 2021;18(5):681–93.
 
65.
Ortega-Vela JA, Muñoz-Gutiérrez PA, Vargas-Cardona HD. Multi-output Gaussian processes applied to modeling and reducing dimensionality of data transmitted in a wireless sensor network. Rev Fac Ing Univ Antioquia. 2025;34(71).
 
66.
Stiasny J, Misyris GS, Chatzivasileiadis S. Physics-informed neural networks for non-linear system identification for power system dynamics. In: 2021 IEEE Madrid PowerTech. Madrid. Spain. 2021; 1–6.
 
67.
Zhao Y, Hu Z, Du W, Geng L, Yang Y. Research on modeling method of autonomous underwater vehicle based on a physics-informed neural network. J Mar Sci Eng. 2024;12(5):801.
 
68.
Zhao Y, Hu Z, Geng L, Zhang S, Li X. Physics-informed AUV modeling method and application under current disturbances. In: 2024 6th International Conference on Robotics and Computer Vision (ICRCV). 2024; 226–31.
 
69.
Liu A, Xue Y, Qin H, Zhu Z. Physics-informed identification of marine vehicle dynamics using hydrodynamic dictionary library-inspired adaptive regression. Ocean Eng. 2024;296:117013.
 
70.
Liu J, Yu F, Yan T, He B, Soares CG. CFD-driven physics-informed generative adversarial networks for predicting AUV hydrodynamic performance. Ocean Eng. 2024;313:119638.
 
71.
Alatabani LE, Saeed RA. XAI applications in autonomous vehicles. In: Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Autonomous Vehicles. Boca Raton. FL USA: CRC Press. 2024; 73–99.
 
72.
Gunning D, Stefik M, Choi J, Miller T, Stumpf S, Yang GZ. XAI—Explainable artificial intelligence. Sci Robot. 2019;4(37):eaay7120.
 
73.
Vennerød CB, Kjærran A, Bugge ES. Long short-term memory RNN. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2105.06756; 2021.
 
74.
Lv PF, He B, Guo J. Position correction model based on gated hybrid RNN for AUV navigation. IEEE Trans Veh Technol. 2021;70(6):5648–57.
 
75.
Chavez AG, Mueller CA, Birk A, Babic A, Miskovic N. Stereo-vision based diver pose estimation using LSTM recurrent neural networks for AUV navigation guidance. In: OCEANS 2017-Aberdeen. Aberdeen. Scotland; 2017:1–7.
 
76.
DiPietro R, Hager GD. Deep learning: RNNs and LSTM. In: Handbook of medical image computing and computer assisted intervention. Cambridge MA. USA: Academic Press. 2020; 503–19.
 
77.
Wang D, Wan J, Shen Y, Qin P, He B. Hyperparameter optimization for the LSTM method of AUV model identification based on Q-learning. J Mar Sci Eng. 2022;10(8):1002.
 
78.
Çifçi OS. Transformer (dönüştürücü) mimarisi kullanarak zaman serilerinde anomali tespiti. Bozok J Eng Arch. 2023;2(1):1–7.
 
79.
Wang J. A tutorial on LLM reasoning: Relevant methods behind ChatGPT O1. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2502.10867; 2025.
 
80.
Chen X, Qu G, Tang Y, Low S, Li N. Reinforcement learning for decision-making and control in power systems: Tutorial, review, and vision; 2021.
 
eISSN:2300-5319
ISSN:1898-4088
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top