MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979727209 · doi:10.1109/tac.2019.2946205

Positivity-Preserving Consensus of Homogeneous Multiagent Systems

2019· article· en· W2979727209 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulti-agent systemHomogeneousMathematicsConsensusProperty (philosophy)Contrast (vision)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceState spaceState (computer science)Space (punctuation)Control theory (sociology)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceControl (management)CombinatoricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This note deals with the positivity-preserving consensus problem for undirected positive multiagent systems. The case that all agents have identical positive state-space models with multiple inputs is investigated. Using positive systems theory and analyzing the properties of the overall closed-loop system, positivity-preserving consensus conditions are derived. In order to preserve the positivity property of the agents, two conditions for positivity-preserving consensus are obtained. In contrast to some existing works that only give sufficient conditions for the solution, necessary and sufficient conditions are provided in this note. Then, the corresponding algorithm is developed for solution. Simulations are used to illustrate the effectiveness of the theoretical results and proposed algorithm.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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