MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897861898 · doi:10.1109/lra.2019.2901638

Learn Fast, Forget Slow: Safe Predictive Learning Control for Systems With Unknown and Changing Dynamics Performing Repetitive Tasks

2019· article· en· W2897861898 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher D. McKinnon, Angela P. Schoellig

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsModel predictive controlComputer scienceGaussian processProcess (computing)Bayesian optimizationRegressionArtificial intelligenceBayesian probabilityControl theory (sociology)Term (time)RobotMachine learningGaussianControl (management)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a control method for improved repetitive path following for a ground vehicle that is geared toward longterm operation, where the operating conditions can change over time and are initially unknown. We use weighted Bayesian linear regression (wBLR) to model the unknown dynamics, and show how this simple model is more accurate in both its estimate of the mean behavior and model uncertainty than Gaussian process regression and generalizes to novel operating conditions with little or no tuning. In addition, wBLR allows us to use fast adaptation and long-term learning in one unified framework to adapt quickly to new operating conditions and learn repetitive model errors over time. This comes with the added benefit of lower computational cost, longer look-ahead, and easier optimization when the model is used in a stochastic model-predictive controller (MPC). In order to fully capitalize on the long prediction horizons that are possible with this new approach, we use Tube MPC to reduce the growth of predicted uncertainty. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in the experiment on a 900-kg ground robot showing results over 3.0 km of driving with both physical and artificial changes to the robot's dynamics. All of our experiments are conducted using a stereo camera for localization.

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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations56
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207