MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205667295 · doi:10.1109/tac.2022.3142127

Event-Triggered Impulsive Control for Nonlinear Systems With Actuation Delays

2022· article· en· W4205667295 on OpenAlexafffund
Kexue Zhang, Elena Braverman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemControl systemComputer scienceControl (management)Event (particle physics)Control engineeringEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies impulsive stabilization of nonlinear systems. We propose two types of event-triggering algorithms to update the impulsive control signals with actuation delays. The first algorithm is based on continuous event detection, while the second type makes decision about updating the impulsive control inputs according to periodic event detection. Sufficient conditions are derived to ensure asymptotic stability of the impulsive control systems with the designed event-triggering algorithms. Lower bounds of the time period between two consecutive events are also obtained, so that the closed-loop impulsive systems are free of Zeno behavior. That is to say that the pulse phenomena are excluded from the event-triggered impulsive control systems, in the community of impulsive differential equations. An illustrative example demonstrates effectiveness of the proposed algorithms and our theoretical 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations73
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicStability and Control of Uncertain SystemsFrench-language works237,207