MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124893291 · doi:10.1177/0959651812450533

Nonlinear multi-objective receding horizon design utilizing state-dependent formulation

2012· article· en· W2124893291 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Gao, Hugh H. T. Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part I Journal of Systems and Control Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParametrization (atmospheric modeling)Nonlinear systemControl theory (sociology)HorizonStability (learning theory)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceDesign methodsMathematicsControl (management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The art of multi-objective design is to extract the best compromise among conflicting requirements. The analytical multi-objective parameter synthesis adopts closed-form specifications that make the multi-objective design in linear systems computationally efficient. In this paper, the analytical multi-objective parameter synthesis method is extended to nonlinear systems via the state-dependent coefficients parametrization method in combination with the receding horizon control technique. The novel contributions presented in this paper are demonstrated on two fronts. First, the objective functions in infinite-time domain are replaced by equivalent finite-time functions with certain terminal terms, where the analytical formulations for the finite-time functions are made available and offer a computationally cost-effective approach. Second, the stability is addressed by adopting the receding horizon control technique. In addition, the proposed design approach shows benefits over the conventional nonlinear optimal control method. Two numerical examples further demonstrate the promising features of the proposed design framework.

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 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 score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part I Journal of Systems and Control EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207