MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563365141 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.10.311

Characterizing Equilibria in Reach Control Under Affine Feedback**This research is supported by The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

2016· article· en· W2563365141 on OpenAlexaffabout
Melkior Ornik, Mireille E. Broucke

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimplexControllabilityAffine transformationSet (abstract data type)TriangulationMathematicsSimplex algorithmControl (management)Mathematical optimizationControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceApplied mathematicsLinear programmingCombinatoricsPure mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: The Reach Control Problem (RCP) deals with driving the states of an affine system on a simplex to leave the simplex through a pre-determined facet. A necessary condition for the solvability of the RCP by a given feedback is that there are no closed-loop equilibria in the simplex. As a stepping stone to fully characterizing when equilibria can be removed from the simplex using feedback, this paper studies the geometric structure of open-loop equilibria. Using a triangulation in which the set of potential equilibria intersects the interior of the simplex, we prove that the equilibrium set contains at most one point, in both the single-input and multi-input case. We additionally improve on the currently available results on reach controllability to characterize when the closed-loop equilibria can be pushed off the simplex using affine feedback.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207