MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210623468 · doi:10.1002/rnc.6027

Data‐driven iterative learning control using a uniform quantizer with an encoding–decoding mechanism

2022· article· en· W4210623468 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIterative learning controlBounded functionRobustness (evolution)Control theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemComputer scienceDecoding methodsQuantization (signal processing)Tracking errorMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work explores the problem of uniform quantization of iterative learning control (ILC) for nonlinear nonaffine systems under a data‐driven design and analysis framework. First, to deal with the strong nonlinearity and nonaffine structure of the systems, an iterative linear data model (iLDM) utilizing more additional parameter information is developed consequently bypassing modeling process. The iLDM only serves for the controller design and analysis without any mechanistic interpretation. Then, an encoding–decoding mechanism (E‐DM) is employed to deal with the bounded tracking performance caused by the uniform quantizer. Using the iLDM, an E‐DM based quantized data‐driven ILC (E‐D QDDILC) method is developed with a quantized learning control law and a quantized parameter estimation law, both of which only utilize the quantized output estimations obtained from the E‐DM. The quantized parameter estimation law enhances the robustness of the proposed E‐D QDDILC as an adaptive mechanism to tune the learning gain in real‐time. A mathematical induction approach and the contraction mapping principle are introduced for the convergence analysis as the basic tools. When the scaling function is bounded, one shows the tracking error is bounded convergent. When the scaling function approaches zero iteratively, a zero convergence can be guaranteed in the iteration domain. The main results are verified through simulation examples.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.238 · 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