MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324645413 · doi:10.1049/iet-cta.2015.1327

Time‐varying gain‐scheduling ‐error mean square stabilisation of semi‐Markov jump linear systems

2016· article· en· W2324645413 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Control Theory and Applications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Gain schedulingJumpMathematicsMarkov chainMarkov processScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationStatisticsControl (management)PhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a time‐varying gain‐scheduling approach is proposed to deal with the problem of stabilisation for a class of semi‐Markov jump linear systems. A more general class of Lyapunov functions that depends not only on the system modes, but also on the staying time during the current system mode is constructed, which can cover the common time‐invariant Lyapunov functions as special cases. In the sense of the σ‐error mean‐square stability proposed previously, the numerically testable sufficient criteria for the stability analysis are derived and certain techniques are employed such that the obtained conditions are linear in the system matrices. Both the time‐invariant and time‐varying control syntheses are investigated, and the results in a recent study can be deemed as extreme cases of the obtained criteria. Finally, the developed theoretical results are verified by three numerical examples, and it is demonstrated that the results based on the time‐varying approach is less conservative than those based on the time‐invariant method.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
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