Equivalence between Neighboring-Extremal Control and Self-Optimizing Control for the Steady-State Optimization of Dynamical Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of steering a dynamical system toward optimal steady-state performance is considered. For this purpose, a static optimization problem can be formulated and solved. However, because of uncertainty, the optimal steady-state inputs can rarely be applied directly in an open-loop manner. Instead, plant measurements are typically used to help reach the plant optimum. This paper investigates the use of optimizing control techniques for input adaptation. Two apparently different techniques of enforcing steady-state optimality are discussed, namely, neighboring-extremal control and self-optimizing control based on the null-space method. These two techniques are compared for the case of unconstrained real-time optimization in the presence of parametric variations. It is shown that, in the noise-free scenario, the two methods can be made equivalent through appropriate tuning. Note that both approaches can use measurements that are taken either at successive steady-state operating points or during the transient behavior of the plant. Implementation of optimizing control is illustrated through a simulated continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR) example.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".