MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392024063 · doi:10.1109/tac.2024.3368867

Stochastic Lyapunov-Barrier Functions for Robust Probabilistic Reach-Avoid-Stay Specifications

2024· article· en· W4392024063 on OpenAlexafffund
Yiming Meng, Jun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsLyapunov functionProbabilistic logicComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Lyapunov optimizationLyapunov redesignStochastic processRobust controlLyapunov equationMathematical optimizationMathematicsLyapunov exponentEngineeringControl systemControl (management)Nonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stability and safety are crucial in safety-critical control of dynamical systems. The reach-avoid-stay objectives for deterministic dynamical systems can be effectively handled by formal methods as well as Lyapunov methods with soundness and approximate completeness guarantees. However, for continuoustime stochastic dynamical systems, probabilistic reach-avoidstay problems are viewed as challenging tasks. Motivated by the recent surge of applications in characterizing safety-critical properties using Lyapunov-barrier functions, we aim to provide a stochastic version for probabilistic reach-avoid-stay problems in consideration of robustness. To this end, based on the weak topology, we first establish a connection between probabilistic stability with safety constraints and reach-avoid-stay specifications. We then prove that stochastic Lyapunov-barrier functions provide sufficient conditions for the target objectives. We apply Lyapunov-barrier conditions in control synthesis for reach-avoidstay specifications, and show its effectiveness in a case study.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207