MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299905875 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1705.01494

Classical Discrete-Time Adaptive Control Revisited: Exponential\n Stabilization

2017· preprint· en· W4299905875 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel E. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Controllability of Differential Equations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Adaptive controlBounded functionExponential stabilityNoise (video)Discrete time and continuous timeMathematicsProjection (relational algebra)sortExponential functionStability (learning theory)Convolution (computer science)Computer scienceControl (management)Nonlinear systemAlgorithmMathematical analysisImage (mathematics)Artificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical discrete-time adaptive controllers provide asymptotic\nstabilization. While the original adaptive controllers did not handle noise or\nunmodelled dynamics well, redesigned versions were proven to have some\ntolerance; however, exponential stabilization and a bounded gain on the noise\nwas rarely proven. Here we consider a classical pole placement adaptive\ncontroller using the original projection algorithm rather than the commonly\nmodifed version; we impose the assumption that the plant parameters lie in a\nconvex, compact set and that the parameter estimates are projected onto that\nset at every step. We demonstrate that the closed-loop system exhibits very\ndesireable closed-loop behaviour: there are linear-like convolution bounds on\nthe closed loop behaviour, which implies exponential stability and a bounded\nnoise gain, as well an easily proven tolerance to unmodelled dynamics and plant\nparameter variation. We emphasize that there is no persistent excitation\nrequirement of any sort.\n

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.134 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicStability and Controllability of Differential EquationsFrench-language works237,207