Multi-Agent Estimation and Filtering for Minimizing Team Mean-Squared Error
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
Motivated by estimation problems arising in autonomous vehicles and decentralized control of unmanned aerial vehicles, we consider multi-agent estimation and filtering problems in which multiple agents generate state estimates based on decentralized information and the objective is to minimize a coupled mean-squared error which we call <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">team mean-square error</i> . We call the resulting estimates as minimum team mean-squared error (MTMSE) estimates. We show that MTMSE estimates are different from minimum mean-squared error (MMSE) estimates. We derive closed-form expressions for MTMSE estimates, which are linear function of the observations where the corresponding gain depends on the weight matrix that couples the estimation error. We then consider a filtering problem where a linear stochastic process is monitored by multiple agents which can share their observations (with delay) over a communication graph. We derive expressions to recursively compute the MTMSE estimates. To illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed scheme we consider an example of estimating the distances between vehicles in a platoon and show that MTMSE estimates significantly outperform MMSE estimates and consensus Kalman filtering estimates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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