MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013111069 · doi:10.1109/tac.2020.2983108

Event-Triggered Optimal Dynamic Formation of Heterogeneous Affine Nonlinear Multiagent Systems

2020· article· en· W3013111069 on OpenAlexafffund
Hongjun Ma, Guang‐Hong Yang, Tongwen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesState Key Laboratory of Synthetical Automation for Process IndustriesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemAffine transformationTrajectoryZeno's paradoxesControl reconfigurationOptimal controlConvergence (economics)Multi-agent systemMathematical optimizationMathematicsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies an optimal dynamic formation problem for heterogeneous affine nonlinear systems. The nonidenticality in agents and the requirement for dynamic spatial reconfiguration make it a challenging task to coordinate different types of agents to maintain an optimized formation shape. In an architecture of event-triggered decision and control, this article investigates how to fulfill dynamic formation by distributively optimizing a team cost function. The basic idea is to design a decision unit for each agent to generate an implicit trajectory as a servo signal, based on which a control unit is designed with a displacement-gradient-based law to achieve the desired local solution. Typical heterogeneous characteristics including different nonlinearities and nonidentical dimensions are dealt with in a unified framework. It is shown that with the proposed triggering mechanisms, the optimal dynamic formation problem can be solved by a distributed control law with only intermittent communication. In theory, the properties of convergence of trajectory tracking errors, optimality of the team solution, and Zeno-freeness of event-triggered mechanisms are proved. Two simulation examples are given to verify the proposed method.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations89
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207