Non-Autonomous Feedback Control for Area Coverage Problems With Time-Varying Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by area coverage optimization problems with time varying risk densities, we propose a decentralized control law for a team of autonomous mobile agents in a two dimensional area such that their asymptotic configurations optimize a generalized non-autonomous coverage metric. The generalized non-autonomous coverage metric explicitly depends on a nonuniform time-varying measurable scalar field that is not directly controllable by agents. Several interesting scenarios emerge with time varying risk density. In this work, we consider the case of area surveillance against moving targets or external threats penetrating through the perimeter, and the case of environmental monitoring and intervention with deployment of mobile sensors in areas affected by penetration of substances governed by diffusion mechanisms, as for example oil in a marine environment. In the presence of time-varying risk density the coverage metric is non-autonomous as it includes a time varying component that does not depend on the evolution of the agents. Our non-autonomous feedback law accounts for the time-varying component through a term that vanishes when the risk eventually stops evolving. Optimality with respect to the induced non-autonomous coverage is proven in the framework of Barbalat’s lemma, and the performance is illustrated through simulation of the these two scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".