MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406312021 · doi:10.1109/tase.2025.3528462

Compensatory Data-Driven Networked Iterative Learning Control With Communication Constraints and DoS Attacks

2025· article· en· W4406312021 on OpenAlexaff
Huimin Zhang, Ronghu Chi, Biao Huang, Zhongsheng Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIterative learning controlIterative methodComputer scienceFadingControl theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemRobustness (evolution)Iterative designData modelingQuantization (signal processing)Control engineeringMathematical optimizationAlgorithmEngineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceDecoding methodsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the three critical factors of data quantization, channel fading, and denial of service (DoS) attack introduced by the networked control systems (NCSs) simultaneously, we propose a novel compensatory data-driven networked iterative learning control (COMP-DDNILC) method for nonlinear repetitive NCSs under a model-free design and analysis framework. By reformulating the iterative input-and-output (I/O) dynamics of the nonlinear NCS as an iterative linear data model (iLDM), an iterative linear predictive data model (iLPDM) is developed to predict the missing data arisen from DoS attacks. Then, a relationship is built to describe the coupling effects of the three critical factors, based on which the COMP-DDNILC is designed by involving the compensatory mechanism of DoS attacks and the fading coefficient inversion to improve the control performance. The COMP-DDNILC also involves an iterative adaption mechanism to update the iLPDM to enhance the robustness against uncertainties. The data-driven nature of COMP-DDNILC makes it applicable to practical NCSs without model information available. The simulation study verifies the results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and EngineeringSame topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207