跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文,按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+0已有论文修订
+93新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-16 01:34 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-15 04:22 — 2026-11-16 04:22(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-16 01:34最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-16 01:33(北京时间)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2604.04528

Receding-Horizon Control via Drifting Models

Daniele Foffano, Alessio Russo, Alexandre Proutiere

原文摘要

We study the problem of trajectory optimization in settings where the system dynamics are unknown and the controller cannot simulate candidate trajectories through a model at test time. When an offline dataset of trajectories is available, an agent could directly learn a trajectory generator by distribution matching. However, this approach only recovers the behavior distribution in the dataset, and does not in general produce a model that minimizes a desired cost criterion. In this work, we propose Drifting Receding Horizon Control (RHC), an offline trajectory optimization framework that combines drifting generative models with receding-horizon planning under unknown dynamics. The goal of Drifting RHC is to learn, from an offline dataset of trajectories, a conditional distribution over trajectories that is both supported by the data and biased toward optimal plans. We show that the target distribution of Drifting RHC is the unique solution of an objective that trades off optimality with closeness to the offline prior. We further bound the gap between the predicted and the executed cost of a generated plan by its consistency with the dynamics, and introduce a rollout-consistency loss that distills a learned model into the generator at training time only. On a mass-spring-damper, a cart-pole and a planar quadrotor, Drifting RHC attains the lowest regret among generative and model-based planners, outperforms DeePC on the nonlinear systems, and plans $9$ to $83$ times faster than iLQR, model-based and diffusion-based planners.

cs.AI