An Adaptive Fuzzy Reinforcement Learning Cooperative Approach for the Autonomous Control of Flock Systems
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
The flock-guidance problem enjoys a challenging structure where multiple optimization objectives are solved simultaneously. This usually necessitates different control approaches to tackle various objectives, such as guidance, collision avoidance, and cohesion. The guidance schemes, in particular, have long suffered from complex tracking-error dynamics. Furthermore, techniques that are based on linear feedback strategies obtained at equilibrium conditions either may not hold or degrade when applied to uncertain dynamic environments. Pre-tuned fuzzy inference architectures lack robustness under such unmodeled conditions. This work introduces an adaptive distributed technique for the autonomous control of flock systems. Its relatively flexible structure is based on online fuzzy reinforcement learning schemes which simultaneously target a number of objectives; namely, following a leader, avoiding collision, and reaching a flock velocity consensus. In addition to its resilience in the face of dynamic disturbances, the algorithm does not require more than the agent position as a feedback signal. The effectiveness of the proposed method is validated with two simulation scenarios and benchmarked against a similar technique from the literature.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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