Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Combining Model-Based and Model-Free Methods for Nonlinear Control: A Provably Convergent Policy Gradient Approach

Optimization and Control · Submitted 12 Jun 2020

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We show this hybrid approach outperforms the model-based controller while avoiding the convergence issues associated with model-free approaches via both numerical experiments and theoretical analyses, in which we derive sufficient conditions on the non-linear component such that our approach is guaranteed to converge to the (nearly) global optimal controller.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID2006.07476 (version 1)
Pith ID6DU2ODSV, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAdam Wierman, Chenkai Yu, Guannan Qu, Steven Low. "Combining Model-Based and Model-Free Methods for Nonlinear Control: A Provably Convergent Policy Gradient Approach." arXiv:2006.07476 (2020). https://pith.science/paper/6DU2ODSV
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,853 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.06 · states limitation 0.45 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.89 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.07 · compares with prior results 0.95 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

Model-free learning-based control methods have seen great success recently. However, such methods typically suffer from poor sample complexity and limited convergence guarantees. This is in sharp contrast to classical model-based control, which has a rich theory but typically requires strong modeling assumptions. In this paper, we combine the two approaches to achieve the best of both worlds. We consider a dynamical system with both linear and non-linear components and develop a novel approach to use the linear model to define a warm start for a model-free, policy gradient method. We show this hybrid approach outperforms the model-based controller while avoiding the convergence issues associated with model-free approaches via both numerical experiments and theoretical analyses, in which we derive sufficient conditions on the non-linear component such that our approach is guaranteed to converge to the (nearly) global optimal controller.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 Model-free learning-based control methods have seen great success recently. background 1.00 0.04 0.01 asserted 1.00
s1 However, such methods typically suffer from poor sample complexity and limited convergence guarantees. background 0.69 0.06 0.02 asserted 0.90
s2 This is in sharp contrast to classical model-based control, which has a rich theory but typically requires strong modeling assumptions. background 0.94 0.04 0.02 asserted 0.98
s3 In this paper, we combine the two approaches to achieve the best of both worlds. contribution 0.97 0.54 0.12 asserted 0.92
s4 We consider a dynamical system with both linear and non-linear components and develop a novel approach to use the linear model to define a warm start for a model-free, policy gradient method. method 0.88 0.96 0.06 asserted 0.98
s5 We show this hybrid approach outperforms the model-based controller while avoiding the convergence issues associated with model-free approaches via both numerical experiments and theoretical analyses, in which we derive sufficient conditions on the non-linear component such that our approach is guaranteed to converge to the (nearly) global optimal controller. result 0.92 0.97 0.93 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 0.99 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.66.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

Model-free learning-based control methods have seen great success recently. However, such methods typically suffer from poor sample complexity and limited convergence guarantees. This is in sharp contrast to classical model-based control, which has a rich theory but typically requires strong modeling assumptions. In this paper, we combine the two approaches to achieve the best of both worlds. We consider a dynamical system with both linear and non-linear components and develop a novel approach to use the linear model to define a warm start for a model-free, policy gradient method. We show this hybrid approach outperforms the model-based controller while avoiding the convergence issues associated with model-free approaches via both numerical experiments and theoretical analyses, in which we derive sufficient conditions on the non-linear component such that our approach is guaranteed to converge to the (nearly) global optimal controller.

Human review
References
How the literature uses it

14 arXiv papers cite this in 30 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 19 sentences without a confident label

Compares with it 1 paper
Cites it as background 5 papers

What it cites · 13 sentences without a confident label

Compares with 1 paper
Cites as background 19 papers

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.