Multi-Objective Agent-Based Model Predictive Controller for Plug-and-Play Vehicle Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional integration is a growing trend in vehicle control, often involving the coordination of multiple controllers to achieve various objectives simultaneously. The need for flexibility and reliability has led to a “plug-and-play” approach in control system design, which presents challenges for traditional integrated model predictive control (MPC). Agent-based model predictive control (AMPC) has recently emerged as a distributed solution that treats controllers as agents, creating a collaborative framework among them to reach a common goal. However, this approach struggles to manage distributed conflicting objectives when agents are coupled or interdependent. To address this, we propose a novel, practical distributed control scheme called multi-objective AMPC, which adapts the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) into a general control strategy that approximates global optimization while decoupling objectives. We systematically develop three formulations that maintain convergence while addressing control regularization and inequality constraints, applying them to complex vehicle control systems for the first time. The proposed method has been tested on two vehicle control scenarios with a multi-objective topology. Different formulations are compared through simulations, and the most computationally efficient one was implemented on an electric vehicle for real-world evaluations. The results demonstrate that the proposed multi-objective AMPC can converge approximately to the same global optimum as integrated MPC with greater flexibility and the potential to reduce computational costs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".