pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22315 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Control of Multi-agent Systems under STL Specifications based on Prescribed Performance Observers

Tommaso Zaccherini , Siyuan Liu , Dimos V. Dimarogonas This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords multi-agent systemsSignal Temporal Logicprescribed performance observersdecentralized controlcooperative tasksstate estimationrobustness to disturbances
0
0 comments X

The pith

Decentralized feedback controllers enforce Signal Temporal Logic tasks in multi-agent systems using only local communication and bounded-error observers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a control method for large groups of heterogeneous agents that must complete cooperative tasks defined by Signal Temporal Logic formulas, despite communicating only with immediate neighbors and facing external disturbances. Each agent deploys a k-hop prescribed performance state observer that reconstructs the states of agents up to k communication steps away from 1-hop neighbor data alone, while keeping reconstruction errors inside designer-chosen bounds. Those error bounds are folded directly into a conservative reformulation of the spatial robustness of the STL formulas, so that keeping the adjusted robustness positive guarantees the original tasks are met even under worst-case estimation uncertainty. A continuous-time decentralized feedback law is then synthesized locally to drive the modified robustness measure positive, delivering formal satisfaction guarantees from local information only.

Core claim

The paper shows that k-hop prescribed performance state observers can be designed to deliver explicit bounds on estimation errors for agents beyond direct communication range, and that these bounds can be incorporated into a modified spatial robustness measure for STL specifications. With the modified robustness in hand, a decentralized continuous-time feedback controller can be constructed that guarantees the original STL specifications are satisfied for heterogeneous multi-agent systems subject to bounded disturbances and estimation errors, using only 1-hop neighbor information.

What carries the argument

The k-hop Prescribed Performance State Observer (k-hop PPSO), which reconstructs states of agents up to k hops away from 1-hop data while enforcing designer-specified error bounds that are then substituted into a worst-case reformulation of STL spatial robustness.

If this is right

  • Agents can satisfy tasks that depend on the behavior of teammates several communication hops away without ever exchanging data directly with them.
  • The guarantees continue to hold when external disturbances remain within the assumed bounds.
  • Each agent implements its controller using only measurements and messages from its direct communication neighbors.
  • The same framework applies to teams whose members have differing dynamics and input constraints.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Choosing a larger k trades higher observer complexity for the ability to handle tasks that span wider neighborhoods, suggesting a tunable communication-performance tradeoff.
  • The approach could be combined with event-triggered communication to further lower bandwidth use while preserving the error bounds.
  • Hardware tests on mobile robots would reveal how sensor noise and packet loss affect the tightness of the prescribed performance bounds in practice.

Load-bearing premise

That a k-hop PPSO can always be constructed to achieve the chosen performance bounds on estimation errors for the given agent dynamics and disturbance levels.

What would settle it

A simulation or hardware experiment in which the realized estimation errors exceed the prescribed bounds and the STL specifications are violated even though the proposed local control law is applied.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22315 by Dimos V. Dimarogonas, Siyuan Liu, Tommaso Zaccherini.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) Communication graph; (b) Agent 1’s 3-hop induced graph. λi(A + B), i = 1, . . . , n, with equality for some i if and only if B is singular and there is a nonzero vector x such that Ax = λi(A)x, Bx = 0, and (A + B)x = λi(A + B)x. Using Lemmas 3 and 4, it follows that: Lemma 5: Under Assumption 2, Mkc i ≻ 0 for all i ∈ V. Proof: Since L kc i is the Laplacian matrix of the subgraph G kc i , we have λmin(L… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The graphs GC and GT , respectively in gray and red, induce two clusters C1 and C2 with V1 = {1, 2, 6} and V2 = {3, 4, 5}. all i, j ∈ L with i ̸= j. As a result, each Cl is associated with ϕ c l = ∧li∈Vlϕli , and the global STL task ϕ can be rewritten as ϕ = ∧ N′ l=1ϕ c l . For later use, let xϕ c l := [x ⊤ l1 , . . . x⊤ lvl ] ⊤ denote the stacked state vector of the agents in cluster Cl . Similarly, defin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The graphs GC and GT , respectively in black and red, induce five clusters C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 with V1 := {1, 2, 3, 4}, V2 := {6}, V3 := {7, 8}, V4 := {5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13} and V5 := {14, 15, 16}. control inputs ui(t), for all i ∈ C5, and the resulting prescribed performance guarantees provided by the k-hop PPSO, namely |x˜ Ni j i (t)| < δNi j i (t) for all i ∈ C5 and Ni j ∈ N k-hop i , task sat￾isfaction … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) State and estimated trajectories; initial states are rep view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper addresses decentralized control of large-scale heterogeneous multi-agent systems subject to bounded external disturbances and limited communication, with the objective of satisfying cooperative Signal Temporal Logic (STL) specifications. The considered specifications involve spatiotemporal tasks that require collaboration among multiple agents, including agents beyond direct communication neighborhoods. To address the communication constraints, a $k$-hop Prescribed Performance State Observer ($k$-hop PPSO) is designed to enable each agent to estimate the states of agents up to $k$ communication hops away using only information from $1$-hop neighbors, while guaranteeing predefined performance bounds on the estimation errors. The estimation error bounds are explicitly incorporated into a reformulation of the spatial robustness of the STL specifications, yielding robustness measures that account for worst-case estimation uncertainty. Based on the modified robustness, a decentralized continuous-time feedback control law is designed to guarantee satisfaction of the STL specifications in the presence of bounded disturbances and estimation errors. The proposed framework provides formal correctness guarantees using only local information and limited communication. Numerical simulations illustrate the theoretical results.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims to develop a decentralized continuous-time feedback control framework for large-scale heterogeneous multi-agent systems subject to bounded disturbances and limited communication. It introduces a k-hop Prescribed Performance State Observer (k-hop PPSO) that estimates states of agents up to k hops away with guaranteed predefined bounds on estimation errors using only 1-hop neighbor information. These error bounds are incorporated into a reformulation of the spatial robustness of cooperative STL specifications, and a feedback control law is designed to ensure the modified robustness remains positive, thereby guaranteeing STL satisfaction.

Significance. If the closed-loop properties are rigorously established, the result would be significant for enabling formal control of MAS with communication constraints on complex spatiotemporal tasks. The combination of prescribed-performance observers with STL robustness measures offers a structured way to handle estimation uncertainty in decentralized settings, extending prior work on STL control to limited-communication scenarios with heterogeneous agents.

major comments (2)
  1. [Observer design and closed-loop analysis] The central claim that the k-hop PPSO maintains its prescribed performance bounds on estimation errors while the agents apply the decentralized STL feedback law (abstract and observer design section) is load-bearing. The observer error dynamics depend on actual agent trajectories shaped by control inputs that in turn depend on the state estimates; if the bound proofs are derived only for open-loop or nominal trajectories rather than the closed-loop vector field including disturbances, the chain from modified robustness > 0 to original STL satisfaction does not hold. A explicit invariance argument or Lyapunov analysis under the coupled dynamics is required.
  2. [STL robustness reformulation] In the STL robustness reformulation (robustness measure section), the incorporation of worst-case estimation error bounds into the spatial robustness is presented as yielding modified measures that guarantee satisfaction. It is unclear whether this reformulation preserves the necessary properties (e.g., monotonicity or Lipschitz continuity) needed for the subsequent control design to be well-posed, especially for heterogeneous agents and k-hop estimates; a counter-example or explicit verification of the modified robustness function would strengthen the claim.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that 'numerical simulations illustrate the theoretical results' but provides no details on the number of agents, communication graph diameter, or specific STL formulas used; adding these would improve reproducibility.
  2. [Preliminaries and notation] Notation for the performance functions and the k-hop neighborhood sets should be defined more explicitly at first use to avoid ambiguity when reading the observer equations.
  3. [Conclusion] The paper would benefit from a brief discussion of how the approach scales with increasing k or number of agents, even if only qualitatively.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and insightful comments, which help strengthen the theoretical foundations of our work. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to provide additional clarity and rigor.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Observer design and closed-loop analysis] The central claim that the k-hop PPSO maintains its prescribed performance bounds on estimation errors while the agents apply the decentralized STL feedback law is load-bearing. The observer error dynamics depend on actual agent trajectories shaped by control inputs that in turn depend on the state estimates; if the bound proofs are derived only for open-loop or nominal trajectories rather than the closed-loop vector field including disturbances, the chain from modified robustness > 0 to original STL satisfaction does not hold. An explicit invariance argument or Lyapunov analysis under the coupled dynamics is required.

    Authors: We agree that explicit treatment of the closed-loop coupling is essential for the guarantees. The observer error dynamics in the manuscript are derived under the full system equations that include bounded disturbances and the decentralized control inputs (which depend on the estimates). However, to make the invariance of the prescribed performance bounds fully transparent, we will add a dedicated invariance argument in the revised observer analysis section. This argument will show that the error bounds remain valid when the closed-loop vector field (incorporating the STL feedback) is substituted, thereby preserving the chain from modified robustness positivity to STL satisfaction. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [STL robustness reformulation] In the STL robustness reformulation, the incorporation of worst-case estimation error bounds into the spatial robustness is presented as yielding modified measures that guarantee satisfaction. It is unclear whether this reformulation preserves the necessary properties (e.g., monotonicity or Lipschitz continuity) needed for the subsequent control design to be well-posed, especially for heterogeneous agents and k-hop estimates; a counter-example or explicit verification of the modified robustness function would strengthen the claim.

    Authors: The modified robustness is obtained by subtracting the (known) worst-case estimation error bounds from the original spatial robustness function. Because the original STL robustness is monotonically non-decreasing in each predicate and the subtraction is a constant offset (independent of the state trajectory), monotonicity is preserved. Lipschitz continuity likewise carries over, as the offset is state-independent. We will add an explicit lemma in the robustness reformulation section verifying these properties for the heterogeneous case and k-hop estimates, confirming that the control design remains well-posed. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation remains self-contained

full rationale

The paper's chain proceeds by treating k-hop PPSO performance bounds as explicit design parameters (chosen to satisfy prescribed transient bounds), inserting those fixed bounds into a modified STL robustness predicate, and then synthesizing a feedback law that enforces the modified predicate. No equation or step reduces the final guarantee to a quantity fitted from the controller outputs themselves, nor does any load-bearing premise collapse to a self-citation whose content is merely renamed. The observer bounds are independent design choices whose validity is asserted separately from the closed-loop STL controller; the abstract and reader's summary give no indication that the central claim is definitionally equivalent to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard assumptions of bounded disturbances and the existence of a k-hop observer with prescribed transient bounds; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • performance function parameters
    User-chosen functions that define the shrinking error envelope for the observer; these are design knobs rather than data-fitted constants.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption External disturbances are bounded.
    Invoked to guarantee that the observer error remains inside the prescribed envelope.
  • domain assumption Communication graph allows k-hop reachability.
    Required for the observer to estimate states beyond direct neighbors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5486 in / 1347 out tokens · 44345 ms · 2026-05-08T10:28:47.157174+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Coordinated multi-robot exploration,

    W. Burgard, M. Moors, C. Stachniss, and F. Schneider, “Coordinated multi-robot exploration,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 376–386, 2005

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    A vision-based formation control framework,

    A. Das, R. Fierro, V . Kumar, J. Ostrowski, J. Spletzer, and C. Taylor, “A vision-based formation control framework,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 813–825, 2002

    work page 2002

  3. [3]

    A review of truck platooning projects for energy savings,

    S. Tsugawa, S. Jeschke, and S. E. Shladover, “A review of truck platooning projects for energy savings,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent V ehicles, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 68–77, 2016

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Cooperative manipulation exploiting only implicit communication,

    A. Tsiamis, C. K. Verginis, C. P. Bechlioulis, and K. J. Kyriakopoulos, “Cooperative manipulation exploiting only implicit communication,” in 2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2015, pp. 864–869

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Monitoring temporal properties of con- tinuous signals,

    O. Maler and D. Nickovic, “Monitoring temporal properties of con- tinuous signals,” inInternational symposium on formal techniques in real-time and fault-tolerant systems. Springer, 2004, pp. 152–166

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Belta, B

    C. Belta, B. Yordanov, and E. A. Gol,F ormal methods for discrete-time dynamical systems. Springer, 2017, vol. 89

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Automatic synthesis of multi- agent motion tasks based on ltl specifications,

    S. G. Loizou and K. J. Kyriakopoulos, “Automatic synthesis of multi- agent motion tasks based on ltl specifications,” in2004 43rd IEEE Con- ference on Decision and Control (CDC)(IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37601), vol. 1. IEEE, 2004, pp. 153–158

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    Distributed communication- aware motion planning for multi-agent systems from stl and spatel specifications,

    Z. Liu, B. Wu, J. Dai, and H. Lin, “Distributed communication- aware motion planning for multi-agent systems from stl and spatel specifications,” in2017 IEEE 56th Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC). IEEE, 2017, pp. 4452–4457

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Multi-agent plan reconfiguration under local ltl specifications,

    M. Guo and D. V . Dimarogonas, “Multi-agent plan reconfiguration under local ltl specifications,”The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 218–235, 2015

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Resilient temporal logic planning in the presence of robot failures,

    S. Kalluraya, G. J. Pappas, and Y . Kantaros, “Resilient temporal logic planning in the presence of robot failures,” in2023 62nd IEEE Confer- ence on Decision and Control (CDC), 2023, pp. 7520–7526

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Multi-agent motion planning from signal temporal logic specifications,

    D. Sun, J. Chen, S. Mitra, and C. Fan, “Multi-agent motion planning from signal temporal logic specifications,”IEEE Robotics and Automa- tion Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 3451–3458, 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Model predictive control with signal temporal logic specifications,

    V . Raman, A. Donz ´e, M. Maasoumy, R. M. Murray, A. Sangiovanni- Vincentelli, and S. A. Seshia, “Model predictive control with signal temporal logic specifications,” in53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2014, pp. 81–87

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    Sampling-based synthesis of maximally-satisfying controllers for temporal logic specifications,

    C.-I. Vasile, V . Raman, and S. Karaman, “Sampling-based synthesis of maximally-satisfying controllers for temporal logic specifications,” in2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2017, pp. 3840–3847. 15 −10 −5 0 5 10 15 (a) Agents’ state in t ∈ [0, 5]s −10 −5 0 5 10 15 x1(t) x2(t) ˆx2 5 ˆx2 6 x3(t) x4(t) x5...

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    Sampling-based motion planning with temporal logic missions and spatial preferences,

    J. Karlsson, F. S. Barbosa, and J. Tumova, “Sampling-based motion planning with temporal logic missions and spatial preferences,”IF AC- PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 15 537–15 543, 2020

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Real- time rrt* with signal temporal logic preferences,

    A. Linard, I. Torre, E. Bartoli, A. Sleat, I. Leite, and J. Tumova, “Real- time rrt* with signal temporal logic preferences,” in2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2023, pp. 8621–8627

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Robust satisfaction of temporal logic over real-valued signals,

    A. Donz ´e and O. Maler, “Robust satisfaction of temporal logic over real-valued signals,” inF ormal Modeling and Analysis of Timed Systems. Springer, 2010, pp. 92–106

    work page 2010

  17. [17]

    Control barrier functions for multi-agent systems under conflicting local signal temporal logic tasks,

    L. Lindemann and D. V . Dimarogonas, “Control barrier functions for multi-agent systems under conflicting local signal temporal logic tasks,” IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 757–762, 2019

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Control of mobile robots using barrier functions under temporal logic specifications,

    M. Srinivasan and S. Coogan, “Control of mobile robots using barrier functions under temporal logic specifications,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 363–374, 2021

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Decen- tralized control of multi-agent systems under acyclic spatio-temporal task dependencies,

    G. Marchesini, S. Liu, L. Lindemann, and D. V . Dimarogonas, “Decen- tralized control of multi-agent systems under acyclic spatio-temporal task dependencies,” in2024 IEEE 63rd Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2024, pp. 5211–5217

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Control-lyapunov and control-barrier func- tions based quadratic program for spatio-temporal specifications,

    K. Garg and D. Panagou, “Control-lyapunov and control-barrier func- tions based quadratic program for spatio-temporal specifications,” in 2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2019, pp. 1422–1429

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    High order control lyapunov-barrier functions for temporal logic specifications,

    W. Xiao, C. A. Belta, and C. G. Cassandras, “High order control lyapunov-barrier functions for temporal logic specifications,” in2021 American Control Conference (ACC), 2021, pp. 4886–4891

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Control barrier functions: Theory and applications,

    A. D. Ames, S. Coogan, M. Egerstedt, G. Notomista, K. Sreenath, and P. Tabuada, “Control barrier functions: Theory and applications,” in2019 18th European Control Conference (ECC). Ieee, 2019, pp. 3420–3431

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Funnel control for fully actuated systems under a fragment of signal temporal logic specifications,

    L. Lindemann and D. V . Dimarogonas, “Funnel control for fully actuated systems under a fragment of signal temporal logic specifications,” Nonlinear Analysis: Hybrid Systems, vol. 39, p. 100973, 2021

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    Controller synthesis of collaborative signal temporal logic tasks for multiagent systems via assume-guarantee contracts,

    S. Liu, A. Saoud, and D. V . Dimarogonas, “Controller synthesis of collaborative signal temporal logic tasks for multiagent systems via assume-guarantee contracts,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 5894–5909, 2025

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Dynamic event-triggered prescribed performance control for nonlinear systems with signal temporal logic,

    L. Long and G. Gao, “Dynamic event-triggered prescribed performance control for nonlinear systems with signal temporal logic,”International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 4753–4768, 2024

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    Robust adaptive control of feedback linearizable mimo nonlinear systems with prescribed perfor- mance,

    C. P. Bechlioulis and G. A. Rovithakis, “Robust adaptive control of feedback linearizable mimo nonlinear systems with prescribed perfor- mance,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 2090–2099, 2008

    work page 2090

  27. [27]

    A communication consistent approach to signal temporal logic task de- composition in multi-agent systems,

    G. Marchesini, S. Liu, L. Lindemann, and D. V . Dimarogonas, “A communication consistent approach to signal temporal logic task de- composition in multi-agent systems,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, pp. 1–16, 2025

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Decentralized observers with consensus filters for distributed discrete-time linear systems,

    B. Ac ¸ıkmes ¸e, M. Mandi´c, and J. L. Speyer, “Decentralized observers with consensus filters for distributed discrete-time linear systems,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1037–1052, 2014

    work page 2014

  29. [29]

    A decen- tralized controller-observer scheme for multi-agent weighted centroid tracking,

    G. Antonelli, F. Arrichiello, F. Caccavale, and A. Marino, “A decen- tralized controller-observer scheme for multi-agent weighted centroid tracking,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 1310–1316, 2013

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    A k-hop graph-based observer for large- scale networked systems,

    A. Gasparri and A. Marino, “A k-hop graph-based observer for large- scale networked systems,” in2017 IEEE 56th Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2017, pp. 4747–4752

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Distributed finite-time tracking control for multi-agent systems: An observer-based approach,

    Y . Zhao, Z. Duan, G. Wen, and Y . Zhang, “Distributed finite-time tracking control for multi-agent systems: An observer-based approach,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 22–28, 2013

    work page 2013

  32. [32]

    Leader-following consensus of discrete-time multi-agent systems with observer-based protocols,

    X. Xu, S. Chen, W. Huang, and L. Gao, “Leader-following consensus of discrete-time multi-agent systems with observer-based protocols,” Neurocomputing, vol. 118, pp. 334–341, 2013

    work page 2013

  33. [33]

    Consensus of linear multi- agent systems with reduced-order observer-based protocols,

    Z. Li, X. Liu, P. Lin, and W. Ren, “Consensus of linear multi- agent systems with reduced-order observer-based protocols,”Systems & Control Letters, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 510–516, 2011

    work page 2011

  34. [34]

    On distributed pinning observers for a network of dynamical systems,

    C. Edwards and P. P. Menon, “On distributed pinning observers for a network of dynamical systems,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 4081–4087, 2016

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Multi-agent estimation and control based on a novel k-hop distributed prescribed performance observer,

    T. Zaccherini, S. Liu, and D. V . Dimarogonas, “Multi-agent estimation and control based on a novel k-hop distributed prescribed performance observer,”IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 9, pp. 841–846, 2025

    work page 2025

  36. [36]

    Robust estimation and control for heterogeneous multi-agent sys- tems based on decentralized k-hop prescribed performance observers,

    ——, “Robust estimation and control for heterogeneous multi-agent sys- tems based on decentralized k-hop prescribed performance observers,” 16 2026 European Control Conference (ECC), accepted, arXiv:2511.09269, 2025

    work page arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    Observer-based control of multi-agent systems under stl specifi- cations,

    ——, “Observer-based control of multi-agent systems under stl specifi- cations,”23rd IF AC World Congress, accepted, arXiv:2602.05586, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Q-learning for robust satisfaction of signal temporal logic specifications,

    D. Aksaray, A. Jones, Z. Kong, M. Schwager, and C. Belta, “Q-learning for robust satisfaction of signal temporal logic specifications,” inIEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2016, pp. 6565–6570

    work page 2016

  39. [39]

    Connectivity based k-hop clustering in wireless networks,

    G. Chen, F. Nocetti, J. Gonzalez, and I. Stojmenovic, “Connectivity based k-hop clustering in wireless networks,” inProceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2002, pp. 2450–2459

    work page 2002

  40. [40]

    Mesbahi and M

    M. Mesbahi and M. Egerstedt,Graph theoretic methods in multiagent networks. Princeton University Press, 2010

    work page 2010

  41. [41]

    R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson,Matrix Analysis, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2012

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    Omni-directional mobile robot controller based on trajectory linearization,

    Y . Liu, J. J. Zhu, R. L. Williams II, and J. Wu, “Omni-directional mobile robot controller based on trajectory linearization,”Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 461–479, 2008

    work page 2008