MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017171920 · doi:10.1109/tac.2014.2310331

Local Observers on Linear Lie Groups With Linear Estimation Error Dynamics

2014· article· en· W2017171920 on OpenAlexaff
Mikhail Koldychev, Christopher Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsLinear systemObserver (physics)Control theory (sociology)Lie groupExponential stabilityApplied mathematicsNonlinear systemComputer scienceMathematical analysisArtificial intelligencePure mathematicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This technical note proposes local exponential observers for systems on linear Lie groups. We study two classes of systems. In the first class, the full state of the system evolves on a linear Lie group and is available for measurement. In the second class, only part of the system's state evolves on a linear Lie group and this portion of the state is available for measurement. In each case, we propose two different observer designs. We show that, depending on the observer chosen, local exponential stability of one of the two observation error dynamics, left- or right-invariant error dynamics, is obtained. For the first class of systems these results are developed by showing that the estimation error dynamics are differentially equivalent to a stable linear differential equation on a vector space. For the second class of system, the estimation error dynamics are almost linear. We illustrate these observer designs on an attitude estimation problem.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear SystemsFrench-language works237,207