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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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