Data‐driven set‐point tuning of model‐free adaptive control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Model‐free adaptive control (MFAC) is an effective data‐driven control method to deal with nonlinear and nonaffine systems. In this article, a data‐driven set‐point tuning (DDST) approach is proposed for MFAC to enhance its control performance. The proposed data‐driven set‐point tuning based MFAC (DDST‐MFAC) system consists of two control loops. The inner control loop takes the MFAC as the feedback controller where a virtual reference error signal is adopted in the control input. The DDST in the outer loop is derived from an ideal nonlinear set‐point tuning (NST) law, which exists in theory, to meet the control target. To realize the theoretically existing NST, a dynamic linearization (DL) technique is introduced. Virtually, the ideal NST law is independent of any controlled system, regardless linear or nonlinear, having an exact model or not. Since the nonlinear system considered in this work does not have any model information available to the designers, the parameter estimation law of the DDST is designed by using the DL method to transfer the original nonlinear system into a linear data model (LDM) with a projection algorithm to estimate the unknown parameters in the LDM. The convergence of tracking error is proved for a regulation scenario. Simulation study is provided to verify the theoretical results.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".