MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4314946886 · doi:10.1109/cdc51059.2022.9992796

Inverse Optimal Control with Discount Factor for Continuous and Discrete-Time Control-Affine Systems and Reinforcement Learning

2022· article· en· W4314946886 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

Venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdaptive Dynamic Programming Control
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimal controlBellman equationControl theory (sociology)MathematicsWeightingMathematical optimizationLinear-quadratic-Gaussian controlQuadratic equationLinear-quadratic regulatorComputer scienceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the inverse optimal control problem of finding the state weighting function that leads to a quadratic value function when the cost on the input is fixed to be quadratic. The paper focuses on a class of infinite horizon discrete-time and continuous-time optimal control problems whose dynamics are control-affine and whose cost is quadratic in the input. The optimal control policy for this problem is the projection of minus the gradient of the value function onto the space formed by all feasible control directions. This projection points along the control direction of steepest decrease of the value function. For discrete-time systems and a quadratic value function the optimal control law can be obtained as the solution of a regularized least squares program, which corresponds to a receding horizon control with a single step ahead. For the single input case and a quadratic value function the solution for small weights in the control energy is interpreted as a control policy that at each step brings the trajectories of the system as close as possible to the origin, as measured by an appropriate norm. Conditions under which the optimal control law is linear are also stated. Additionally, the paper offers a mapping of the optimal control formulation to an equivalent reinforcement learning formulation. Examples show the application of the 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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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