Transfer learning for high‐precision trajectory tracking through adaptive feedback and iterative learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Robust and adaptive control strategies are needed when robots or automated systems are introduced to unknown and dynamic environments where they are required to cope with disturbances, unmodeled dynamics, and parametric uncertainties. In this paper, we demonstrate the capabilities of a combined adaptive control and iterative learning control (ILC) framework to achieve high‐precision trajectory tracking in the presence of unknown and changing disturbances. The adaptive controller makes the system behave close to a reference model; however, it does not guarantee that perfect trajectory tracking is achieved, while ILC improves trajectory tracking performance based on previous iterations. The combined framework in this paper uses adaptive control as an underlying controller that achieves a robust and repeatable behavior, while the ILC acts as a high‐level adaptation scheme that mainly compensates for systematic tracking errors. We illustrate that this framework enables transfer learning between dynamically different systems, where learned experience of one system can be shown to be beneficial for another different system. Experimental results with two different quadrotors show the superior performance of the combined ‐ILC framework compared with approaches using ILC with an underlying proportional‐derivative controller or proportional‐integral‐derivative controller. Results highlight that our ‐ILC framework can achieve high‐precision trajectory tracking when unknown and changing disturbances are present and can achieve transfer of learned experience between dynamically different systems. Moreover, our approach is able to achieve precise trajectory tracking in the first attempt when the initial input is generated based on the reference model of the adaptive controller.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it