Optimized Control Invariance Conditions for Uncertain Input-Constrained Nonlinear Control Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Providing safety guarantees for learning-based controllers is important for real-world applications. One approach to realizing safety for arbitrary control policies is safety filtering. If necessary, the filter modifies control inputs to ensure that the trajectories of a closed-loop system stay within a given state constraint set for all future time, referred to as the set being positive invariant or the system being safe. Under the assumption of fully known dynamics, safety can be certified using control barrier functions (CBFs). However, the dynamics model is often either unknown or only partially known in practice. Learning-based methods have been proposed to approximate the CBF condition for unknown or uncertain systems from data; however, these techniques do not account for input constraints and, as a result, may not yield a valid CBF condition to render the safe set invariant. In this letter, we study conditions that guarantee control invariance of the system under input constraints and propose an optimization problem to reduce the conservativeness of CBF-based safety filters. Building on these theoretical insights, we further develop a probabilistic learning approach that allows us to build a safety filter that guarantees safety for uncertain, input-constrained systems with high probability. We demonstrate the efficacy of our proposed approach in simulation and real-world experiments on a quadrotor and show that we can achieve safe closed-loop behavior for a learned system while satisfying state and input constraints.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".