A Framework for Coordinated Control of Multiagent Systems and Its Applications
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a framework is proposed for the distributed control and coordination of multiagent systems (MASs). In the proposed framework, the control of MASs is regarded as achieving decentralized control and coordination of agents. Each agent is modeled as a coordinated hybrid agent, which is composed of an intelligent coordination layer and a hybrid control layer. The intelligent coordination layer takes the coordination input, plant input, and workspace input. In the proposed framework, we describe the coordination mechanism in a domain-independent way, i.e., as simple abstract primitives in a coordination rule base for certain dependence relationships between the activities of different agents. The intelligent coordination layer deals with the planning, coordination, decision making, and computation of the agent. The hybrid control layer of the proposed framework takes the output of the intelligent coordination layer and generates discrete and continuous control signals to control the overall process. To verify the feasibility of the proposed framework, experiments for both heterogeneous and homogeneous MASs are implemented. The proposed framework is applied to a multicrane system, a multiple robot system, and a MAS consisting of an overhead crane, a mobile robot, and a robot manipulator. It is demonstrated that the proposed framework can model the three MASs. The agents in these systems are able to cooperate and coordinate to achieve a global goal. In addition, the stability of systems modeled using the proposed framework is also analyzed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it