MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964384356 · doi:10.1109/isie.2019.8781450

Optimal Sampling Rate and Quantization for Networked Control Systems

2019· article· en· W2964384356 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Hossein Roohi, Tongwen Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantization (signal processing)Sampling (signal processing)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Networked control systemQueueing theoryNorm (philosophy)Upper and lower boundsControl systemMathematicsMathematical optimizationControl (management)AlgorithmTelecommunicationsComputer networkArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sampling and quantization in Networked Control Systems (NCS) are addressed in this paper. The NCS studied in this paper consists of a continuous time plant, a sensor network and a discrete time controller. The amount of network induces delay to the control system is a function of the sampling rate of the control system. An upper bound for the delay will be found using network calculus which is a theory for deterministic queuing. From the control side of view, we consider a delayed sampled data system and propose a method to study the effects of sampling and delay in a unified framework. We define the quality-of-control in the sense of a ${\mathcal{H}_\infty }$ norm of the system and we propose a method to minimize this norm. According to our result, the optimal solution may not corresponds to the lowest sampling rate and it depends on the dynamics of the system and parameters of the communication link. We also extend the result to investigate the effect of quantization by proposing a new finite level quantizer. Similar to the sampling rate, we show that a larger number of allocated bits for quantization does not necessarily result in a better quality-of-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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStability and Control of Uncertain SystemsFrench-language works237,207