MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Observations on Causal Iterative-Learning-Control & Transients

2024· article· en· W4402260524 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIterative learning controlComputer scienceControl (management)Control theory (sociology)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iterative Learning Control (ILC) is a technique for adaptive feed-forward control of electro-mechanical plant. This paper and companion [7] deals with ILC behaviours encountered before the widespread adoption of Q-ILC, the quadratic optimization. This paper explains, for the first time, the structural causes of “bad learning transients” for causal learning in terms of the cumulant iteration matrix - which can only be constructed by the method of forward-substitution. This paper underscores the importance of the linear weighted-sums of the column elements of the iteration matrix, and their relation to the convergence of sum of squares and Parseval's theorem. These criteria have the advantage that no model is required; the measured impulse response is sufficient information. Finally, the paper reminds readers that there are also wave-like (soliton) solutions of the ILC equations that may occur even when all convergence criteria are satisfied.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207