MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896216259 · doi:10.1142/s2301385019400016

Time-Varying Formation Control for Time-Delayed Multi-Agent Systems with General Linear Dynamics and Switching Topologies

2018· article· en· W2896216259 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Xiao, Jianglong Yu, Rui Wang, Xiwang Dong, Qingdong Li, Zhang Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueUnmanned Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNetwork topologyControl theory (sociology)Multi-agent systemComputer scienceLinear matrix inequalityProtocol (science)Stability (learning theory)Linear systemControl (management)Topology (electrical circuits)MathematicsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Time-varying formation analysis and design problems for general linear multi-agent systems with switching interaction topologies and time-varying delays are studied. Firstly, a consensus-based formation control protocol is constructed using local information of the neighboring agents. An algorithm with three steps is presented to design the proposed formation control protocol. Then, based on linear matrix inequality technique and common Lyapunove–Krasovskii stability theory, sufficient conditions for general linear multi-agent systems with switching topologies and time-varying delays to achieve time-varying formation are given together with a time-varying formation feasibility condition. Finally, a numerical simulation is given to demonstrate the effectiveness of the obtained theoretical results.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations40
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnmanned SystemsSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207