Decentralized Coordinated Motion Control of Two Hydraulic Actuators Handling a Common Object
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, reinforcement learning is applied to coordinate, in a decentralized fashion, the motions of a pair of hydraulic actuators whose task is to firmly hold and move an object along a specified trajectory under conventional position control. The learning goal is to reduce the interaction forces acting on the object that arise due to inevitable positioning errors resulting from the imperfect closed-loop actuator dynamics. Each actuator is therefore outfitted with a reinforcement learning neural network that modifies a centrally planned formation constrained position trajectory in response to the locally measured interaction force. It is shown that the actuators, which form a multiagent learning system, can learn decentralized control strategies that reduce the object interaction forces and thus greatly improve their coordination on the manipulation task. However, the problem of credit assignment, a common difficulty in multiagent learning systems, prevents the actuators from learning control strategies where each actuator contributes equally to reducing the interaction force. This problem is resolved in this paper via the periodic communication of limited local state information between the reinforcement learning actuators. Using both simulations and experiments, this paper examines some of the issues pertaining to learning in dynamic multiagent environments and establishes reinforcement learning as a potential technique for coordinating several nonlinear hydraulic manipulators performing a common task.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".