MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4314946895 · doi:10.1109/cdc51059.2022.9993169

Consistency and Rate of Convergence of Switched Least Squares System Identification for Autonomous Markov Jump Linear Systems

2022· article· en· W4314946895 on OpenAlexaff
Borna Sayedana, Mohammad Afshari, Peter E. Caines, Aditya Mahajan

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRate of convergenceConvergence (economics)Least-squares function approximationIdentification (biology)Markov chainStrong consistencyConsistency (knowledge bases)Linear systemMathematicsSystem identificationApplied mathematicsComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)StatisticsData modelingArtificial intelligenceDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate the problem of system identification for autonomous Markov jump linear systems (MJS) with complete state observations. We propose switched least squares method for identification of MJS, show that this method is strongly consistent, and derive data-dependent and data-independent rates of convergence. In particular, our data-dependent rate of convergence shows that, almost surely, the system identification error is $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt {\log (T)/T} )$ where T is the time horizon. These results show that switched least squares method for MJS has the same rate of convergence as least squares method for autonomous linear systems. We compare our results with those in the literature and present numerical examples to illustrate the performance of the proposed system identification method.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)Same topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207