Q-Learning and Double Q-Learning with Sliding Mode Control to stabilize a Ball-and-Beam System

In this paper, Q-learning and Double Q-learning reinforcement learning algorithms were used to fine-tune sliding mode controller parameters to balance the Ball-and-Beam system. Each algorithm was experimented with a 5-action action set and a 12-action action set, and the results were compared. The result is evaluated based on the system response after a disturbed reset. The experiment result shows that Double Q-learning performs better with larger action sets, putting the ball at the center of the beam only after 1.8 seconds. However, Q-learning performs better with smaller action sets, taking up to 2.3 seconds. Double Q-learning generally performed better than Q-learning, taking approximately 0.3 seconds less overall.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/tencon61640.2024.10902835
Primary Topic
Iterative Learning Control Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Q-Learning and Double Q-Learning with Sliding Mode Control to stabilize a Ball-and-Beam System

Narong Aphiratsakun, Xavier Jonathon Blake, Ratchapol Pichittanarak, Kasit Pacharatam
Iterative Learning Control Systems
article

Q-Learning and Double Q-Learning with Sliding Mode Control to stabilize a Ball-and-Beam System

Narong Aphiratsakun, Xavier Jonathon Blake, Ratchapol Pichittanarak, Kasit Pacharatam
article en

Abstract

In this paper, Q-learning and Double Q-learning reinforcement learning algorithms were used to fine-tune sliding mode controller parameters to balance the Ball-and-Beam system. Each algorithm was experimented with a 5-action action set and a 12-action action set, and the results were compared. The result is evaluated based on the system response after a disturbed reset. The experiment result shows that Double Q-learning performs better with larger action sets, putting the ball at the center of the beam only after 1.8 seconds. However, Q-learning performs better with smaller action sets, taking up to 2.3 seconds. Double Q-learning generally performed better than Q-learning, taking approximately 0.3 seconds less overall.

Waseda University (JP), University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Iterative Learning Control Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.