MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1549764604 · doi:10.23919/ecc.2007.7068886

Guaranteed cost dynamic output feedback control of satellite formation flying: Centralized versus decentralized control

2007· article· en· W1549764604 on OpenAlexafffund
Navid Dadkhah, Luís Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Convex optimizationDecentralised systemComputer scienceOutput feedbackMathematical optimizationLinear matrix inequalityOptimization problemBandwidth (computing)Controller (irrigation)Control (management)Control engineeringRegular polygonEngineeringMathematicsTelecommunicationsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this paper is to develop a guaranteed cost controller synthesis method for both centralized and decentralized control of satellite formation flying architectures. The main contributions of this paper are twofold. First, guaranteed cost centralized controller design is formulated as a convex optimization problem subject to a set of Linear Matrix Inequalities (LMIs). Second, decentralized guaranteed cost output feedback control is formulated as a nonconvex optimization problem subject to a set of Bilinear Matrix Inequalities (BMIs). The controller design techniques offer two main advantages over previous approaches. First, they rely only on output measurements. Second, they optimize a functional that weights the formation control energy. The simulation results for a leader-follower architecture show that the choice of a decentralized versus a centralized control scheme is an engineering trade off between communication bandwidth and control energy expenditure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207