Adaptive Model Predictive Control for Cruise Control of High-Speed Trains with Time-Varying Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cruise control of high-speed trains is challenging due to the presence of time-varying air resistance coefficients and control constrains. Because the resistance coefficients for high-speed trains are not accurately known and will change with the actual operating environment, the precision of high speed train model is lower. In order to ensure the safe and effective operation of the train, the operating conditions of the train must meet the safety constraints. The most traditional cruise control methods are PID control, model predictive control, and so on, in which the high-speed train model is identified offline. However, the traditional methods typically suffer from performance degradations in the presence of time-varying resistance coefficients. In this paper, an adaptive model predictive control (MPC) method is proposed for cruise control of high-speed trains with time-varying resistance coefficients. The adaptive MPC is designed by combining an adaptive updating law for estimated parameters and a multiply constrained MPC for the estimated system. It is proved theoretically that, with the proposed adaptive MPC, the high-speed trains track the desired speed with ultimately bounded tracking errors, while the estimated parameters are bounded and the relative spring displacement between the two neighboring cars is stable at the equilibrium state. Simulations results validate that proposed method is better than the traditional model predictive control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".