Conservative to confident: Treating uncertainty robustly within Learning-Based Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robust control maintains stability and performance for a fixed amount of model uncertainty but can be conservative since the model is not updated online. Learning-based control, on the other hand, uses data to improve the model over time but is not typically guaranteed to be robust throughout the process. This paper proposes a novel combination of both ideas: a robust Min-Max Learning-Based Nonlinear Model Predictive Control (MM-LB-NMPC) algorithm. Based on an existing LB-NMPC algorithm, we present an efficient and robust extension, altering the NMPC performance objective to optimize for the worst-case scenario. The algorithm uses a simple a priori vehicle model and a learned disturbance model. Disturbances are modelled as a Gaussian Process (GP) based on experience collected during previous trials as a function of system state, input, and other relevant variables. Nominal state sequences are predicted using an Unscented Transform and worst-case scenarios are defined as sequences bounding the 3σ confidence region. Localization for the controller is provided by an on-board, vision-based mapping and navigation system enabling operation in large-scale, GPS-denied environments. The paper presents experimental results from testing on a 50 kg skid-steered robot executing a path-tracking task. The results show reductions in maximum lateral and heading path-tracking errors by up to 30% and a clear transition from robust control when the model uncertainty is high to optimal control when model uncertainty is reduced.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".