Numerical solution of large‐scale Lyapunov equations, Riccati equations, and linear‐quadratic optimal control problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We study large‐scale, continuous‐time linear time‐invariant control systems with a sparse or structured state matrix and a relatively small number of inputs and outputs. The main contributions of this paper are numerical algorithms for the solution of large algebraic Lyapunov and Riccati equations and linear‐quadratic optimal control problems, which arise from such systems. First, we review an alternating direction implicit iteration‐based method to compute approximate low‐rank Cholesky factors of the solution matrix of large‐scale Lyapunov equations, and we propose a refined version of this algorithm. Second, a combination of this method with a variant of Newton's method (in this context also called Kleinman iteration) results in an algorithm for the solution of large‐scale Riccati equations. Third, we describe an implicit version of this algorithm for the solution of linear‐quadratic optimal control problems, which computes the feedback directly without solving the underlying algebraic Riccati equation explicitly. Our algorithms are efficient with respect to both memory and computation. In particular, they can be applied to problems of very large scale, where square, dense matrices of the system order cannot be stored in the computer memory. We study the performance of our algorithms in numerical experiments. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".