Optical-Flow Wingbeat Counting in MuJoCo: A Comparison of Convolutional, Spiking, and Attention-Based Temporal Models
Published 16 Sept 2026arXiv:2609.17308
Updated 11 h ago · first seen 16 Sept 2026
paper_01M2MD9PXVSR5G9MBF01E1BQPB
Abstract
Visual monitoring of flapping-wing vehicles requires distinguishing individual wingbeats from motion strength and average frequency. This paper presents a controlled MuJoCo evaluation of wingbeat counting from signed optical flow observed by virtual cameras mounted on Crazyflie vehicles. Three flapping-wing models were recorded at optical distances of 1.5 and 3.0 m, producing 1,440 clips from 240 paired scene configurations with a scene-level 3:1 training-test split. A common spatial convolutional encoder was combined with a causal temporal convolutional network, a recurrent leaky integrate-and-fire spiking network, or causal self-attention. Each model predicted phase and activity, followed by the same directed-crossing event counter. The six existing convolutional models were retained, and all twelve new models were frozen before their test predictions were generated. Exact-count accuracies at 1.5 m were 96.67%, 95.00%, and 96.67%, respectively; at 3.0 m they were 94.44%, 92.22%, and 95.00%. All paired scene-bootstrap intervals for differences in exact-count accuracy included zero. Seven far-distance spiking-model clips had correct totals despite event-timing mismatches, demonstrating why total-count and event-level measurements must be reported together. The results support the feasibility of causal optical-flow counting in the tested setting and identify boundary-sensitive errors. They do not establish an architecture ranking across repeated training, real-flight robustness, or hardware efficiency.
Organizations
Organizations 0
No organization stated. arXiv metadata does not carry affiliations; an organization is linked only when a model card or lab page cites the paper.
Models
Models introduced or described 0
Inbound described_by relations from model cards and documentation.
No model links this paper yet
Datasets
Datasets used 0
No dataset relation recorded.
Benchmarks
Benchmarks used 0
No benchmark relation recorded.
Code
Repositories & frameworks 0
No repository linked.
Timeline
Timeline 1
- New paperPaperOptical-Flow Wingbeat Counting in MuJoCo: A Comparison of Convolutional, Spiking, and Attention-Based Temporal Models
New paper: Optical-Flow Wingbeat Counting in MuJoCo: A Comparison of Convolutional, Spiking, and Attention-Based Temporal Models
arxiv
Sources
Sources 1
Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.