MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417298197 · doi:10.1115/1.4070653

An Information-State Based Approach to Linear Time Varying System Identification and Control

2025· article· en· W4417298197 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Naveed Gul Mohamed, Raman Goyal, Ran Wang, Suman Chakravorty

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsRockwell Automation (Canada)
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIdentification (biology)System identificationRepresentation (politics)Realization (probability)Autoregressive–moving-average modelControl theory (sociology)Linear systemAutoregressive modelState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper considers the problem of system identification for linear time-varying systems. We propose a new system realization approach that uses an “information-state” as the state vector, where the information-state is composed of a finite number of past inputs and outputs. Using this framework, we develop a system identification algorithm that uses input–output data to fit an autoregressive moving average model (ARMA) to represent the current output in terms of finite past inputs and outputs. This information-state-based approach allows us to directly realize a state-space model using the estimated time-varying ARMA parameters for linear time-varying (LTV) systems. The paper develops the theoretical foundation for using ARMA parameters-based system representation using only the concept of linear observability, details the reasoning for exact output modeling using only the finite history, and shows that there is no need to separate the free and the forced response for identification. The paper also discusses the implications of using the information-state system for optimal output feedback control and shows that the solution obtained using a suitably posed information-state problem is optimal for the original problem. The proposed approach is tested on various different systems, and the performance is compared with state-of-the-art LTV system identification techniques.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207