Back to search
2105.06577

Online Algorithms and Policies Using Adaptive and Machine Learning Approaches

Anuradha M. Annaswamy, Anubhav Guha, Yingnan Cui, Joseph E. Gaudio, José M. Moreu

correctmedium confidence
Category
Not specified
Journal tier
Strong Field
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper’s Theorem 1 proves boundedness, asymptotic tracking (e→0), and constant regret R=O(1) for the AC‑RL controller under Assumptions A1–A3 and A4′ using a Lyapunov function that weights parameter errors by Λ*; its appendix derives ė = A_H e + B_r Λ* Θ̃ ω and shows V̇ = −e^T Q e, then invokes Barbalat’s lemma. The candidate solution reproduces the same structure: introduces K* and Λ*-weighted errors, matches the error model, selects the same Lyapunov function up to notation, obtains exact cross‑term cancellation to V̇ = −e^T Q e, concludes e ∈ L2∩L∞ and e→0 by Barbalat, and deduces R(T) ≤ V(0). Minor notational differences aside, the arguments coincide with the paper’s proof sketch and appendix details (Assumptions A1–A3, A4′; controller (36)–(39); proof steps (83)–(86); regret (13)) .

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field

\textbf{Justification:}

The continuous-time AC–RL result (Theorem 1) is correct and aligns with well-established MRAC techniques. The integration with RL is clearly framed via A4′, and the stability and regret arguments are rigorous within the stated class. The appendix concisely derives the error model and Lyapunov function. Minor revisions would improve clarity (e.g., expanding the sketch where it refers to external arguments and being explicit about Λ* non-singularity). The contribution is solid for the adaptive control + RL community and is supported by numerical validation.