A Privacy Preserving Solution for Cloud-Enabled Set-Theoretic Model Predictive Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloud computing solutions enable Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs) to utilize significant computational resources and implement sophisticated control algorithms even if limited computation capabilities are locally available for these systems. However, such a control architecture suffers from an important concern related to the privacy of sensor measurements and the computed control inputs within the cloud. This paper proposes a solution that allows implementing a set-theoretic model predictive controller on the cloud while preserving this privacy. This is achieved by exploiting the offline computations of the robust one-step controllable sets used by the controller and two affine transformations of the sensor measurements and control optimization problem. It is shown that the transformed and original control problems are equivalent (i.e., the optimal control input can be recovered from the transformed one) and that privacy is preserved if the control algorithm is executed on the cloud. Moreover, we show how the actuator can take advantage of the set-theoretic nature of the controller to verify, through simple set-membership tests, if the control input received from the cloud is admissible. The correctness of the proposed solution is verified by means of a simulation experiment involving a dual-tank water system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".