A combined method for stability analysis of linear time invariant control systems based on <scp>Hermite‐Fujiwara</scp> matrix and Cholesky decomposition
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we have developed an integrative method for checking the stability of linear time‐invariant (LTI) systems as well as nonlinear continuous‐time ones. In our method, we first apply the iterative Faddeev–Leverrier algorithm to obtain the characteristic polynomial of the LTI system. Subsequently, the associated Hermite‐Fujiwara matrix will be evaluated by a particularly efficient technique for the calculation of the Bézoutian matrices. The positive‐definiteness of the Hermite‐Fujiwara form, as the stability criterion, is next tested by performing the Cholesky decomposition. Our method is extended to assess the local stability of nonlinear continuous‐time systems with the help of the Jacobian matrix concept. The proposed method is demonstrated to approximately be 2.2 times faster than the classical Hurwitz algorithm in average, at least for matrices with dimensions less than 40, according to a performed central processing unit (CPU) time analysis. For the sake of illustration, four numerical examples are given, including dynamical models for a real‐world hydrolysis reactor and a well‐mixed bioreactor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it