MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388544048 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2023.3326830

A Self-Triggered Impulsive Approach to Group Consensus of MASs With Sensing/Actuation Delays

2023· article· en· W4388544048 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiang Xie, Xiaodi Li, Shiji Song, Xinzhi Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Impulse (physics)Computer scienceInterval (graph theory)Controller (irrigation)Upper and lower boundsFlexibility (engineering)Lyapunov functionControl (management)MathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a self-triggered impulsive framework for group consensus of multiagent systems (MASs). Two types of self-triggered delayed impulsive control schemes are proposed to regulate impulsive protocols with sensing and actuation delays, respectively. Here, the Lyapunov-based and comparison-system-based approaches are constructed to achieve the iterative updates of impulse sequences with flexibility, especially the upper bound or average interval of impulsive periods is not restricted explicitly. In addition, several sufficient criteria for multigroup consensus of MASs with sensing and actuation delays are presented, where the correlation inequalities between trigger parameters, time delays, and control strengths are established to promote the co-design of impulsive controller and self-triggering algorithm. The Zeno behavior could be successfully eliminated. It is shown that the presented self-triggered schemes do not necessitate continuous or periodic event-detections and the interaction for neighboring agents works in an impulsive manner, which significantly saves the resource consumption of communication and control. Finally, two numerical examples illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed schemes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations35
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207