Observer-Based Feedback Stabilization of Linear Systems with Event-triggered Sampling and Dynamic Quantization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of output feedback stabilization in linear systems when the measured outputs and control inputs are subject to event-triggered sampling and dynamic quantization. A new sampling algorithm is proposed for outputs which does not lead to accumulation of sampling times and results in asymptotic stabilization of the system. The approach for output sampling is based on defining an event function that compares the difference between the current output and the most recently transmitted output sample not only with the current value of the output, but also takes into account a certain number of previously transmitted output samples. This allows us to reconstruct the state using an observer with sample-and-hold measurements. The estimated states are used to generate a control input, which is subjected to a different event-triggered sampling routine; hence the sampling times of inputs and outputs are asynchronous. Using Lyapunov-based approach, we prove the asymptotic stabilization of the closed-loop system and show that there exists a minimum inter-sampling time for control inputs and for outputs. To show that these sampling routines are robust with respect to transmission errors, only the quantized (in space) values of outputs and inputs are transmitted to the controller and the plant, respectively. A dynamic quantizer is adopted for this purpose, and an algorithm is proposed to update the range and the centre of the quantizer that results in an asymptotically stable closed-loop system.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".