Causality-Informed Data-Driven Predictive Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a useful and efficient alternative to generic model-based control scheme, data-driven predictive control (DDPC) is subject to bias-variance tradeoff and is known to not perform desirably in face of uncertainty. Through the connection between direct data-driven control and subspace predictive control (SPC), we gain insight into the reason being the lack of causality as a main cause for their high variance of implicit prediction. In this brief, we derive a new causality-informed formulation of DDPC and its regularized form that balances between control cost minimization and implicit identification of a causal multistep predictor. Since the proposed causality-informed formulations only call for block-triangularization of a submatrix in the generic noncausal DDPC based on LQ factorization, our causality-informed formulation of DDPC enjoys computational efficiency. Its efficacy is investigated through numerical examples and application to model-free control of a simulated industrial heating furnace. Empirical results corroborate that the proposed method yields obvious performance improvement over existing formulations in handling stochastic noise and process nonlinearity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".