MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408323957 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25666

Robust optimal iterative learning control for constrained batch processes with nonuniform batch lengths

2025· article· en· W4408323957 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIterative learning controlRobustness (evolution)Mathematical optimizationControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceBatch processingRegular polygonLinear matrix inequalityOptimization problemIterative methodConvex optimizationEllipsoidRobust controlControl (management)MathematicsControl systemEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In practical applications, the durations of operations in uncertain batch processes may fluctuate due to security considerations, physical constraints, and environmental changes. Regarding this issue, this paper addresses iterative learning control (ILC) for a class of uncertain single‐input single‐output (SISO) batch processes with nonuniform batch lengths. The aim is to develop an optimization‐based ILC scheme that guarantees robustness while meeting input constraints requirements. Two robust optimal ILC algorithms resting upon the modified error update model are proposed for the nonuniform batch length problem, where the linear matrix inequality (LMI) optimization techniques are employed to deal with polytopic and ellipsoidal model uncertainties. Hence, the ILC design requirements are reduced to a convex optimization method involving LMIs, which results in iterative input update signals at the end of each batch. Also, the theoretical analyses of the proposed algorithms are presented. Finally, two numerical cases for batch processes are simulated to testify the feasibility and performance of the proposed methods.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.174 · 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