MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120452442 · doi:10.1109/acc.2007.4282287

A New Predictor-based Repetitive Learning Control Approach for a Class of Remote Control Nonlinear Systems

2007· article· en· W2120452442 on OpenAlexaff
Ya‐Jun Pan, Long Sheng

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... American Control Conference/Proceedings of the American Control Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Nonlinear systemTracking errorTrajectoryConvergence (economics)Iterative learning controlComputer scienceLipschitz continuityLinear matrix inequalityMathematicsControl (management)Mathematical optimizationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a repetitive learning control (RLC) approach is proposed for a class of remote control nonlinear systems satisfying the global Lipschitz condition. Since there exist time delays in the two transmission channels, tracking a desired trajectory through a remote controller is not an easy task. In order to solve this problema predictor is designed on the controller side to predict the future state of the nonlinear system based on the delayed measurements from the sensor. The convergence of the estimation error of the predictor is ensured. The gain design of the predictor applies linear matrix inequality - LMI techniques developed by Lyapunov Kravoskii method for time delay systems. The repetitive learning control law is constructed based on the feedback error from the predicted state. The overall tracking error tends to zero asymptotically over iterations. A numerical simulation example is shown to verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... American Control Conference/Proceedings of the American Control ConferenceSame topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207