Jump to content

Toy OED: Difference between revisions

From mintOC
Line 45: Line 45:


Here is one local solution to the above control problem.
Here is one local solution to the above control problem.
<gallery caption="Reference solution plots" widths="180px" heights="140px" perrow="2">
Image:Toy OED.png| States and fishing control.
</gallery>


== Miscellaneous and Further Reading ==
== Miscellaneous and Further Reading ==

Revision as of 07:26, 20 August 2025

Toy OED
State dimension: 1
Differential states: 4
Discrete control functions: 1


The Toy OED problem looks for an optimal measurement strategy to determine a single parameter in a one-dimensional ODE model, where can directly measure the single state.

The optimal integer control functions shows bang bang behavior.

Mathematical formulation

For a single parameter p the original initial value problem is given by x˙(t)=px(t),t[0,tf],x(0)=x0.

We assume both x0 and tf to be fixed and are only interested in when to measure, with an upper bound M on the measuring time. We can measure the state directly, i.e. h(x(t))=x(t). Thus, the experimental design problem simplifies to:

minx,G,F,z,w1/F(tf)subject tox˙(t)=px(t),G˙(t)=pG(t)+x(t),F˙(t)=w(t)G(t)2,z˙(t)=w(t),x(0)=x0,G(0)=F(0)=z(0)=0,w(t)𝒲,0Mz(tf)

Parameters

These fixed values are used within the model:

x0=1;tf=0.2;𝒲=[0,1];M=0.2

Reference Solutions

Here is one local solution to the above control problem.

Miscellaneous and Further Reading

The Toy OED problem was introduced by Sebastian Sager in the paper [Sager2013]Author: Sager, S.
Journal: SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization
Number: 4
Pages: 3181--3207
Title: Sampling Decisions in Optimum Experimental Design in the Light of Pontryagin's Maximum Principle
Url: http://mathopt.de/PUBLICATIONS/Sager2013.pdf
Volume: 51
Year: 2013
Link to Google Scholar
, which contains further details.

References

[Sager2013]Sager, S. (2013): Sampling Decisions in Optimum Experimental Design in the Light of Pontryagin's Maximum Principle. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 51, 3181--3207Link to Google Scholar