MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885245712 · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2018.2859801

Functional Nonlinear Model Predictive Control Based on Adaptive Dynamic Programming

2018· article· en· W2885245712 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lu Dong, Jun Yan, Xin Yuan, Haibo He, Changyin Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdaptive Dynamic Programming Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsModel predictive controlControl theory (sociology)Optimal controlRobustness (evolution)Nonlinear systemDynamic programmingComputer scienceMathematical optimizationArtificial neural networkLyapunov functionMathematicsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a functional model predictive control (MPC) approach based on an adaptive dynamic programming (ADP) algorithm with the abilities of handling control constraints and disturbances for the optimal control of nonlinear discrete-time systems. In the proposed ADP-based nonlinear MPC (NMPC) structure, a neural-network-based identification is established first to reconstruct the unknown system dynamics. Then, the actor-critic scheme is adopted with a critic network to estimate the index performance function and an action network to approximate the optimal control input. Meanwhile, as the MPC strategy can effectively determine the current control by solving a finite horizon open-loop optimal control problem, in the proposed algorithm, the infinite horizon is decomposed into a series of finite horizons to obtain the optimal control. In each finite horizon, the finite ADP algorithm solves the optimal control problem subject to the terminal constraint, the control constraint, and the disturbance. The uniform ultimate boundedness of the closed-loop system is verified by the Lyapunov approach. Finally, the ADP-based NMPC is conducted on two different cases and the simulation results demonstrate the quick response and strong robustness of the proposed method.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations88
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CyberneticsSame topicAdaptive Dynamic Programming ControlFrench-language works237,207