Decentralized Linear Quadratic Systems With Major and Minor Agents and Non-Gaussian Noise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A decentralized linear quadratic system with a major agent and a collection of minor agents is considered. The major agent affects the minor agents, but not vice versa. The state of the major agent is observed by all agents. In addition, the minor agents have a noisy observation of their local state. The noise process isnotassumed to be Gaussian. The structures of the optimal strategy and the best linear strategy are characterized. It is shown that the major agent's optimal control action is a linear function of the major agent's minimum mean-squared error (MMSE) estimate of the system state while the minor agent's optimal control action is a linear function of the major agent's MMSE estimate of the system state and a “correction term” that depends on the difference of the minor agent's MMSE estimate of its local state and the major agent's MMSE estimate of the minor agent's local state. Since the noise is non-Gaussian, the minor agent's MMSE estimate is a nonlinear function of its observation. It is shown that replacing the minor agent's MMSE estimate with its linear least mean square estimate gives the best linear control strategy. The results are proved using a direct method based on conditional independence, common-information-based splitting of state and control actions, and simplifying the per-step cost based on conditional independence, orthogonality principle, and completion of squares.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".