MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336159922 · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2015.2428056

Synchronous Hybrid Event- and Time-Driven Consensus in Multiagent Networks With Time Delays

2015· article· en· W2336159922 on OpenAlexafffund
Feng Xiao, Tongwen Chen, Huijun Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Network topologyControl theory (sociology)ConsensusTime shiftingLTI system theoryDiscrete time and continuous timeMulti-agent systemDistributed computingControl (management)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer networkLinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the delay robustness of a class of synchronous hybrid event- and time-driven consensus protocols in undirected networks. These protocols can ensure the system performance at reduced data-sampling rates. We consider three types of time delays in feedbacks, including one common time delay, multiple time-invariant delays, and multiple time-varying delays; and by sampled-data control techniques, we characterize the maximum allowable time delay and the event-detecting period for solving the average consensus problem in terms of the algebraic structure of interaction topologies. Simulations are given to show the effectiveness of 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)0.004
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations90
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CyberneticsSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207