MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964730156 · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2014.2345734

Missile Guidance Law Based on Robust Model Predictive Control Using Neural-Network Optimization

2014· article· en· W1964730156 on OpenAlexaff
Zhijun Li, Yuanqing Xia, Chun‐Yi Su, Jun Deng, Jun Fu, Wei He

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMissileModel predictive controlArtificial neural networkControl theory (sociology)Quadratic programmingParametric statisticsInterceptionComputer scienceMathematical optimizationControl (management)Dual (grammatical number)Optimal controlBenchmark (surveying)Constraint (computer-aided design)LawBounded functionEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this brief, the utilization of robust model-based predictive control is investigated for the problem of missile interception. Treating the target acceleration as a bounded disturbance, novel guidance law using model predictive control is developed by incorporating missile inside constraints. The combined model predictive approach could be transformed as a constrained quadratic programming (QP) problem, which may be solved using a linear variational inequality-based primal-dual neural network over a finite receding horizon. Online solutions to multiple parametric QP problems are used so that constrained optimal control decisions can be made in real time. Simulation studies are conducted to illustrate the effectiveness and performance of the proposed guidance control law for missile interception.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations109
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning SystemsSame topicGuidance and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207