Constraint data‐driven optimal terminal ILC of end product quality for a class of I/O constrained batch processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In order to deal with the I/O constraints in a practical plant, a soft limiter is often added into the control design procedure directly; however, the performance of the soft limiter based control approach will be degraded greatly due to the use of the soft constraints. This paper proposes a data‐driven optimal terminal iterative learning control (constraint‐DDOTILC) approach for the end product quality control of batch processes with I/O hard constraints. To deal with nonlinearities, a novel iterative dynamic linearization method without omitting any information of the original plant is introduced such that the derived linearized data‐driven model is completely equivalent to the original nonlinear system. By transferring all the constraints on the system output, control input, and the change rate of input signals into a linear inequality, a novel constraint‐DDOTILC is developed by minimizing an objective function under the derived linear matrix inequality constraint. The optimal learning gain of the constraint‐DDOTILC can be updated iteratively according to the input and output measurements to enhance the flexibility for modifications and expansions of the controlled plant. Both theoretical analysis and simulation results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed constraint‐DDOTILC.
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".