Strengthening Lattice Kalman Filters: Introducing Strong Tracking Lattice Filtering for Enhanced Robustness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work develops a novel formulation of the lattice Kalman filter (LKF) for enhanced robustness. This novel approach initially integrates the concept of sliding innovation to refine the measurement update phase of the LKF, ensuring that the filter’s innovation is constrained within predetermined bounds; the resultant robust filter is designated as the Bounded Innovation Lattice Kalman Filter (BILF). To enhance its numerical stability and adaptive response to rapid changes in the process model or observational data, a Jacobian-free formulation of BILF with a time-varying bounded layer is first developed and then augmented with the adaptive fading factor strategy, leading to the establishment of a robust estimation method, termed as Strong Tracking LKF (ST-LKF). The developed estimation algorithm, in comparison with several renowned filters, is applied to the real-time estimation of states and output power of a single-machine infinite bus (SMIB) system under significantly noisy conditions. The effectiveness of ST-LKF is rigorously tested against a spectrum of operational conditions, including time-variant step and/or ramp inputs, measurement outliers, and short circuits, encompassing both stable and unstable states. Simulation results validate that the proposed filtering strategy excels in terms of accuracy and robustness when faced with model uncertainties and extreme noise levels, consistently maintaining its performance in estimating states across different designed scenarios.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".