A Policy Iteration Approach for Flock Motion 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
The flocking motion control is concerned with managing the possible conflicts between local and team objectives of multi-agent systems. The overall control process guides the agents while monitoring the flock-cohesiveness and localization. The underlying mechanisms may degrade due to overlooking the unmodeled uncertainties associated with the flock dynamics and formation. On another side, the efficiencies of the various control designs rely on how quickly they can adapt to different dynamic situations in real-time. An online model-free policy iteration mechanism is developed here to guide a flock of agents to follow an independent command generator over a time-varying graph topology. The strength of connectivity between any two agents or the graph edge weight is decided using a position adjacency dependent function. An online recursive least squares approach is adopted to tune the guidance strategies without knowing the dynamics of the agents or those of the command generator. It is compared with another reinforcement learning approach from the literature which is based on a value iteration technique. The simulation results of the policy iteration mechanism revealed fast learning and convergence behaviors with less computational effort.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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