Robust Self-Learning Fault-Tolerant Control for Hypersonic Flight Vehicle Based on ADHDP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, a robust self-learning fault-tolerant control (FTC) strategy is proposed to deal with the tracking control problem of the hypersonic flight vehicle (HFV) with uncertainties, actuator faults, and external disturbances. First, an adaptive baseline controller is constructed to achieve stable tracking, in which neural networks are introduced to approximate the unknown dynamics, adaptive laws are formulated to compensate the unknown lumped disturbances, and the Nussbaum technique is applied to address the time-varying actuator faults. Then, to improve the command tracking performance of the baseline controller, a data-driven auxiliary controller which can adaptively adjust the action–critic network weights over time along with the tracking deviation to obtain the optimal control signals in the sense of performance index is developed based on action-dependent heuristic dynamic programming technology. Finally, a comprehensive robust self-learning FTC law is constructed by synthesizing the baseline controller and the auxiliary controller, which leads to good robustness and tracking performance of the closed-loop HFV system. The stability and the superiority of the proposed control algorithm are verified by the Lyapunov theory and comparative numerical simulations, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".