MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887426136 · doi:10.23919/acc.2018.8431686

Linear Model Predictive Control for Schrödinger Equation

2018· article· en· W2887426136 on OpenAlexaff
Jukka-Pekka Humaloja, Stevan Dubljević

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Controllability of Differential Equations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModel predictive controlDiscretizationControl theory (sociology)Linear-quadratic regulatorStability (learning theory)Optimal controlMathematicsHorizonBoundary (topology)Quadratic equationReduction (mathematics)Applied mathematicsController (irrigation)Riccati equationSchrödinger equationMathematical optimizationControl (management)Computer sciencePartial differential equationMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper considers the finite-horizon constrained optimal control problem for Schrödinger equation with boundary controls and boundary observations. The plant is mapped from continuous to discrete time using the Cayley-Tustin transform, which preserves input-output-stability of the plant. The proposed transformation is structure and energy preserving and does not induce order reduction associated with the spatial discretization. The controller design setting leads to the finite horizon constrained quadratic regulator problem, which is easily realized and accounts in explicit manner for input and output/state constraints. The model predictive control (MPC) design is realized for Schrödinger equation and the results are illustrated with numerical simulations showing successful stabilization of Schrödinger equation with simultaneous satisfaction of input and output/state constraints.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.249
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStability and Controllability of Differential EquationsFrench-language works237,207