MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2534851334 · doi:10.1109/cacsd.2016.7602547

Computing maximal invariant sets for switched nonlinear systems

2016· article· en· W2534851334 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonlinear systemInvariant (physics)Control theory (sociology)ComputationMathematicsNonlinear dynamical systemsDynamical systems theoryDiscrete time and continuous timeNonlinear controlInvariant polynomialApplied mathematicsPolynomialComputer scienceMathematical analysisAlgorithmControl (management)Artificial intelligenceMatrix polynomial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invariant sets play a fundamental role in the analysis and control design of dynamical systems. In this paper, we consider computation of maximal invariant sets for discrete-time switched nonlinear systems. Switched nonlinear systems are described as a family of nonlinear systems with a discrete variable that decides which mode will be active at a specific time. We consider two scenarios: one leads to the computation of switching controlled invariant sets and the other leads to computation of invariant sets subject to arbitrary switching. The main result of the paper establishes that the outer approximations computed using interval analysis indeed converge to the maximal invariant sets for general switched nonlinear systems without any stability assumptions. The proposed method is illustrated with nonlinear systems with polynomial dynamics.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207