MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763967643 · doi:10.1109/ccta.2017.8062701

Observer based leader following consensus for multi-agent systems with random packet loss

2017· article· en· W2763967643 on OpenAlexaff
Zipeng Huang, Ya‐Jun Pan

Bibliographic record

Venue2017 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBernoulli's principleMulti-agent systemControl theory (sociology)ConsensusComputer scienceObserver (physics)Linear matrix inequalityNetwork packetAsynchronous communicationLyapunov functionMathematical optimizationDouble integratorPacket lossMathematicsNonlinear systemEngineeringComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the leader-follower consensus problem of multi-agent systems (MASs) consisting of general linear agents in the event of stochastic communication link failure over the network. Bernoulli process is applied to model the packet dropout during operation while the packet dropout in communication links are assumed to be asynchronous and independent. A distributed observer-type algorithm is proposed based on the sufficient conditions using Lyapunov-based method, linear matrix inequality (LMI) techniques and the separation principle. It is shown that the sufficient conditions can be decomposed into small conditions of same dimension as a single agent, provided that the followers are symmetrically connected, which leads to efficient solutions when considering consensus problem of a large group of high-order linear agents. Numerical simulations for groups of five double-integrator agents and three linearized quadcopter agents are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2017 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA)Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207