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 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 · 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.

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 score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

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 head0.011
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