MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171505431 · doi:10.1049/iet-cta.2012.0613

Distributed stochastic consensus of multi‐agent systems with noisy and delayed measurements

2013· article· en· W2171505431 on OpenAlexafffund
Jun Liu, Hongtao Zhang, Xinzhi Liu, Wei‐Chau Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Control Theory and Applications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Multi-agent systemComputer scienceConsensusArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Networked systems are often subject to environmental uncertainties and communication delays, which make timely and accurate information exchange among neighbours difficult or impossible. This study investigates the distributed consensus problem of dynamical networks of multi‐agents in which each agent can only obtain noisy and delayed measurements of the states of its neighbours. The authors consider consensus protocols that take into account both the noisy measurements and the communication time delays, and introduce the notions of almost sure average‐consensus and p th moment average‐consensus. Using a convergence theorem for continuous‐time semimartingales and moment inequality techniques for stochastic delay differential equations, the authors establish sufficient conditions for both almost sure and moment average‐consensus. These results naturally generalise to networks with arbitrary and Markovian switching topologies. The consensus protocol considered here can be applied to networks with arbitrary bounded communication delays, which appears to the first consensus algorithm that is both average preserving and robust to arbitrarily sized delays. Numerical simulations are also provided to demonstrate the theoretical results.

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)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
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

Citations41
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Control Theory and ApplicationsSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207