MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110029763 · doi:10.1109/tac.2006.880961

Near Optimal LQR Performance for a Compact Set of Plants

2006· article· en· W2110029763 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel E. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear-quadratic regulatorControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Context (archaeology)Optimal controlSet (abstract data type)Quadratic equationComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical optimizationControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we consider the problem of providing near optimal performance (in this context, "near optimal performance" means performance as close to optimality as desired) for a large set of possible models. We adopt the linear quadratic regulator (LQR) framework in the single-input-single-output (SISO) setting, and prove that given a compact set of controllable and observable plant models of a fixed order, we can construct a single linear periodic controller (LPC) which provides near optimal LQR performance. Since the controller is linear, it automatically has the nice feature that there is some degree of tolerance to unmodeled dynamics. The approach is also shown to work if the goal is the more modest one of pole placement, and it can be simplified if there is additional structure to the plant model

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 spread0.207 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicStability and Control of Uncertain SystemsFrench-language works237,207