MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320002624 · doi:10.1109/tac.2023.3240381

Stability and Performance of Asynchronous Sampled-Data Interconnected Systems: An Integral Approach

2023· article· en· W4320002624 on OpenAlexafffund
Feng Xiao, Long Wang, Tongwen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationStability (learning theory)Sampling (signal processing)Focus (optics)Bounded functionNotationTranslation (biology)Computer scienceLyapunov functionControl theory (sociology)AlgorithmMathematicsControl (management)ArithmeticArtificial intelligenceDetectorMathematical analysisTelecommunicationsMachine learningNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we focus on the stability of asynchronous sampled-data interconnected systems and the evaluation of how asynchronous sampling and time delays degrade the <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\mathcal {L}_{2}$</tex-math></inline-formula> gains from exogenous inputs to controlled outputs. To judge the stability and evaluate the performance of systems, an integral approach is proposed and it combines a revised form of input-to-state stability Lyapunov conditions with an integral description of bounded measurement errors. Practical procedures for the application of the approach are further presented. In the case with shared sampling periods, a time-translation approach is introduced to investigate the relationship between asynchronous sampling and time delays.

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 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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicStability and Control of Uncertain SystemsFrench-language works237,207