Double-Layered Iterative Learning Control for Nonlinear Systems
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
This work aims at improving the control performance of the iterative learning control through set-point learning along iteration direction. A double-layered learning control mechanism is designed for both the control input and the set-point, respectively. The learning control of the input is regarded as a local controller in the inner layer, and the learning control of the set-point is designed as an auxiliary controller in the outer layer whose design is a main challenge since no any priori knowledge is available to describe the relationship between the set-point and the control performance. To solve this issue, an ideal nonlinear nonaffine set-point learning optimization (SPLO) algorithm is designed by taking the set-point and the tracking error as the arguments. Then, an iterative dynamic linearization (iDL) is introduced to formulate the ideal SPLO algorithm as a linear parametric one whose unknown parameter is estimated by designing a parameter updating algorithm. Further, since a strongly nonlinear and nonaffine system is considered without any model information available, the iDL is also used to derive its equivalent linear data model which is then updated by the input and output data to make the linear parametric SPLO realizable. Finally, a double-layered iterative learning control (DLILC) is proposed under the data-driven framework for tracking an iteration-varying trajectory. Convergence analysis and extensive simulations are included to demonstrate the effectiveness of the presented DLILC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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