MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3150068615 · doi:10.1002/rnc.5507

Switching event‐triggering mechanisms for integral input‐to‐state stable nonlinear systems

2021· article· en· W3150068615 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Yu, Xia Chen, Fei Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsZeno's paradoxesControl theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemLyapunov functionFunction (biology)State (computer science)MathematicsEvent (particle physics)Multiple integralComputer scienceControl (management)Mathematical analysisAlgorithmPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article studies the event‐triggered control problem for nonlinear systems that are merely integral input‐to‐state stable (iISS) with respect to measurement errors and external inputs. By using the iISS Lyapunov function, which comes from a necessary and sufficient condition on iISS, an integral‐based event‐triggering mechanism is introduced to compensate the effects of measurement errors. Under some assumptions on the gains of the iISS Lyapunov function, both the closed‐loop iISS and Zeno‐freeness are proved when the external inputs are measurable. In the presence of unknown disturbances, a novel switching event‐triggering mechanism is designed based on the relationship between the transmitted state and some threshold constant. Subsequently, the corresponding lower bound of inter‐event times is given explicitly to ensure Zeno‐freeness. It is shown that the proposed switching mechanism can be applicable to the nonlinear systems where some existing event‐triggering mechanisms are invalid in avoiding Zeno behavior. Finally, numerical simulations are provided to illustrate the efficiency and feasibility of the obtained results.

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 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 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 score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.235
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Robust and Nonlinear ControlSame topicStability and Control of Uncertain SystemsFrench-language works237,207