MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114115376 · doi:10.1109/tac.2005.852562

Stabilization in the presence of an uncertain arbitrarily large delay

2005· article· en· W2114115376 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 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)LTI system theoryController (irrigation)Linear systemUpper and lower boundsStability (learning theory)Feedback controllerMathematicsInvariant (physics)Computer scienceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Handling delays in control systems is difficult and is of long-standing interest. It is well known that, given a finite-dimensional linear time-invariant (LTI) plant and a finite-dimensional LTI stabilizing controller, closed-loop stability will be maintained under a small delay in the feedback loop. However, in some situations there is a large delay, perhaps arising from a slow communications link or a large but variable computational delay (e.g., in a system which uses image processing). While there are techniques available to design a controller to handle a known delay, there is no general theory for designing a controller to handle an arbitrarily large uncertain delay. Here we prove constructively that, given a finite-dimensional LTI plant and an upper bound on the admissible time delay, there exists a linear periodic controller which robustly stabilizes the plant.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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