MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226271707 · doi:10.1109/tac.2022.3170370

Robust Model Predictive Control Using a Two-Step Triggering Scheme

2022· article· en· W4226271707 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlRobust controlBounded functionRobustness (evolution)Scheme (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationInvariant (physics)Computer scienceLTI system theoryQuadratic equationSequence (biology)Stability (learning theory)MathematicsLinear systemControl systemControl (management)EngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is concerned with event-triggered robust model predictive control for linear discrete-time systems with bounded disturbances. A two-step scheme involving a tentative verification of a triggering condition and a delayed triggering with a waiting horizon is proposed to reduce the average triggering rate and fully utilize the nominal optimal control sequence minimizing a quadratic cost function. The triggering condition and the waiting horizon are synthesized based on a prediction model of the plant and a robust positively invariant set associated with it. Under mild conditions, recursive feasibility and closed-loop robust stability are guaranteed. Two examples are used to show the effectiveness and merits of the proposed approach.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
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