Robust Predictive Output-Feedback Safety Filter for Uncertain Nonlinear Control Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In real-world applications, we often require reliable decision making under dynamics uncertainties using noisy high-dimensional sensory data. Recently, we have seen an increasing number of learning-based control algorithms developed to address the challenge of decision making under dynamics uncertainties. These algorithms often make assumptions about the underlying unknown dynamics and, as a result, can provide safety guarantees. This is more challenging for other widely used learning-based decision making algorithms such as reinforcement learning. Furthermore, the majority of existing approaches assume access to state measurements, which can be restrictive in practice. In this paper, inspired by the literature on safety filters and robust output-feedback control, we present a robust predictive output-feedback safety filter (RPOF-SF) framework that provides safety certification to an arbitrary controller applied to an uncertain nonlinear control system. The proposed RPOF-SF combines a robustly stable observer that estimates the system state from noisy measurement data and a predictive safety filter that renders an arbitrary controller safe by (possibly) minimally modifying the controller input to guarantee safety. We show in theory that the proposed RPOF-SF guarantees constraint satisfaction despite disturbances applied to the system. We demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed RPOF-SF algorithm using an uncertain mass-spring-damper 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".