MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326035682 · doi:10.3166/jesa.40.1113-1139

Commande mixte <i>H<sub>2</sub>/H<sub>∞</sub></i>. Une approche par la stratégie de Stackelberg

2006· article· fr· W2326035682 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marc Jungers, Emmanuel Trélat, Hisham Abou‐Kandil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStackelberg competitionNorm (philosophy)Mathematical economicsNash equilibriumMathematical optimizationGame theoryComputer scienceHierarchyConstraint (computer-aided design)MathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mixed H 2 /H ∞ control corresponds to design a control minimizing a system H 2 norm with respect to a sub-optimal constraint on a H ∞ norm. This is an open field of research, despite the abundance of approach in the literature. This paper uses a game theoretic approach to formalize the management of different criteria (one for H 2 norm and one for H ∞ norm). Even if this approach was already used with Nash strategy in the literature, we propose here to use Stackelberg strategy, which is adapted to manage different criteria with a hierarchy between them. Necessary conditions for a finite time horizon are developed and lead to a singular (cheap) control. This property is interpreted in game theoretic terms: Stackelberg strategy degenerates in Nash strategy. By using conjugate times theory, we emphasize that these conditions are also sufficient. Some numerical example illustrates our approach.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207