Asymptotic Tracking and Linear-Like Behavior Using Multi-Model Adaptive Control
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
In this article, we consider the problem of tracking for a discrete-time plant with unknown plant parameters; we assume knowledge of an upper bound on the plant order, and for each admissible order we assume knowledge of a compact set in which the plant parameters lie. We carry out parameter estimation of an associated auxiliary model; indeed, for each admissible dimension, we cover the set of admissible parameters by a finite number of compact and convex sets and use an original-projection-algorithm-based estimator for each set. At each point in time, we employ a switching algorithm to determine which model and parameter estimates are used in the pole-placement-based control law. We prove that this adaptive controller guarantees desirable linear-like closed-loop behavior: exponential stability, a bounded noise gain in every <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$p$</tex-math></inline-formula> -norm, a convolution bound on the effect of the exogenous inputs, as well as exponential tracking for certain classes of reference and noise signals; this linear-like behavior is leveraged to immediately show tolerance to a degree of plant time-variations and unmodeled dynamics.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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