data-driven-distributed-control

star 1

Data-driven distributed controller synthesis using spatial regret optimization. For synthesizing optimal distributed controllers directly from frequency-response data without requiring a parametric system model. Use when: (1) designing distributed control systems from experimental data, (2) comparing spatial regret vs H2/Hinf performance, (3) building data-driven controllers with communication structure constraints, (4) model-free controller synthesis for networked systems.

hiyenwong By hiyenwong schedule Updated 6/3/2026

name: data-driven-distributed-control description: > Data-driven distributed controller synthesis using spatial regret optimization. For synthesizing optimal distributed controllers directly from frequency-response data without requiring a parametric system model. Use when: (1) designing distributed control systems from experimental data, (2) comparing spatial regret vs H2/Hinf performance, (3) building data-driven controllers with communication structure constraints, (4) model-free controller synthesis for networked systems.

Data-Driven Distributed Control via Spatial Regret

Core Methodology (arXiv:2605.02506)

Synthesize optimal distributed controllers directly from frequency-response data using spatial regret — measures performance gap between a structured distributed controller and an oracle with enhanced communication topology.

Key Concepts

Spatial Regret

  • Quantifies the cost of distributed communication constraints
  • Compares structured controller performance against an oracle with richer communication
  • Relaxes topology assumptions: oracle can use any enhanced structure
  • Provides a principled trade-off between communication cost and control performance

Data-Driven Synthesis

  • Uses experimentally obtained frequency-response data (no parametric model needed)
  • Preserves stability and desired communication structure
  • Iterative solution (not single convex program) due to relaxed oracle assumptions
  • Outperforms classical H2/Hinf designs in numerical benchmarks

Workflow

Step 1: Collect Frequency-Response Data

Obtain G(jw) from experiments or identification at discrete frequencies.

Step 2: Define Communication Structure

Specify which subsystems can communicate via structural constraint matrix S (S[i,j]=1 means subsystem i can access subsystem j measurements).

Step 3: Solve Spatial Regret Problem (Iterative)

  1. Initialize controller K with desired structure
  2. Compute oracle K_oracle with relaxed constraints
  3. Minimize regret: min_K [J(K) - J(K_oracle)]
  4. Iterate until convergence

Step 4: Validate

  • Check stability margins
  • Compare H2/Hinf performance metrics
  • Verify communication structure preservation

Comparison: Spatial Regret vs Classical Methods

Criterion H2/Hinf Spatial Regret
Model required Yes (parametric) No (frequency data)
Communication constraints Hand-fixed Explicitly optimized
Oracle comparison None Built-in
Conservatism High Reduced
Computation Single program Iterative

Pitfalls

  • Iterative solution may not converge for ill-conditioned systems
  • Frequency data quality critically affects synthesis result
  • Oracle definition must be carefully chosen (too relaxed = trivial regret)

Reference

arXiv:2605.02506 — Gupta, Martinelli, Ferrari-Trecate, Furieri, Karimi (2026)

Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/hiyenwong/ai_collection --skill data-driven-distributed-control
Repository Details
star Stars 1
call_split Forks 0
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator