MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623626268 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22917

Coordinated distributed moving horizon state estimation for linear systems based on prediction‐driven method

2017· article· en· W2623626268 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tianrui An, Xunyuan Yin, Jinfeng Liu, J. Fraser Forbes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimationState (computer science)HorizonComputer scienceMoving horizon estimationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceKalman filterAlgorithmEngineeringExtended Kalman filter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distributed framework has been considered as one promising framework for the control of large‐scale systems. In this work, we propose a coordination algorithm for distributed moving horizon state estimators (MHEs) for discrete‐time linear systems composed of subsystems. In particular, the class of linear system we focus on is composed of several subsystems that interact with each other via their states. In the proposed coordinated distributed MHE (CDMHE) scheme, each subsystem is associated with a local MHE. In the design of a local MHE, a coordinating term is incorporated into its cost function which is determined by an upper‐layer coordinator. At each sampling time, a local MHE estimates its local state and system noise, and then sends them to the coordinator. The coordinator calculates a price vector based on information received from all the local MHEs and sends the price vector together with the calculated interaction estimates to each local MHE. The above steps are performed iteratively every sampling time. It is shown that the CDMHE scheme is able to achieve the estimation performance of the corresponding centralized design if convergence at each sampling time is ensured. A simulation study based on a chemical process is presented to illustrate the applicability and effectiveness of the proposed scheme. The cases with communication failures, and premature termination are also discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207