MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094092254 · doi:10.1080/00207170600576880

Controller reduction with error performance: continuous- and discrete-time cases

2006· article· en· W2094092254 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Control · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityKillam TrustsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsParameterized complexityMathematicsReduction (mathematics)Control theory (sociology)Convex optimizationController (irrigation)Linear matrix inequalityLinearizationProjection (relational algebra)MinificationMathematical optimizationRegular polygonDiscrete time and continuous timeComputer scienceNonlinear systemAlgorithmControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is concerned with the problem of controller reduction for linear systems. Both continuous- and discrete-time cases are considered, with necessary and sufficient conditions obtained for the existence of desired reduced order controllers. In solving this problem, two approaches are presented. The first approach is based on the projection lemma, where the admissible controllers can be parameterized after a set of conditions are satisfied; and the second one directly incorporates the controller matrices to be determined into a set of conditions by introducing new techniques, and thus no parameterization procedure is needed. These necessary and sufficient conditions are formulated in terms of linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) plus some equality constraints. Since these conditions are not convex, the cone complementarity linearization (CCL) idea is exploited to cast them into sequential minimization problems subject to LMI constraints, which can be readily solved by standard numerical software. A numerical example shows the effectiveness of the controller reduction methods.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.190 · 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