Dissipative Neural State-Space Identification
Implementation & benchmark of arXiv:2609.02071 — Turnpike properties in nonlinear system identification
Source paper: Turnpike properties in nonlinear system identification arXiv:2609.02071 ⓘ · analyzed Sep 3, 2026
AI-generated research hypothesis, automatically tested. Not peer-reviewed.
Idea description
Attach a learned nonnegative storage function to a neural state-space model and penalize violations of a strict dissipativity inequality during rollout training. The resulting telescoping inequality limits cumulative output deviation and provides a monitor for whether long-horizon simulations are entering a stable turnpike regime.
Formulas
Mathematical statement
Let ℓₖ be the output prediction stage loss, ℓ* a reference optimal stage loss, Vφ(x) ≥ 0 a storage function, and d(yₖ,yₖ*) an output distance to a reference trajectory. Strict dissipativity requires ℓₖ − ℓ* ≥ Vφ(xₖ₊₁) − Vφ(xₖ) + α(d(yₖ,yₖ*)), where α(r) > 0 for r > 0. Summing over time telescopes the storage terms and bounds cumulative deviation by accumulated excess loss plus Vφ(x₀) − Vφ(x_N). Parameterize Vφ(x) = ||gφ(x)||² + δ||x||², with δ > 0, and use α(r) = ρr². Penalize the squared positive part of the inequality residual. The storage decrease and positive output penalty are the mechanisms that prevent persistent trajectory deviation.
Implementation notes
Add a small storage network gφ to the neural state-space model. During each rollout, compute xₖ₊₁, yₖ, the ordinary prediction loss ℓₖ, and Vφ(xₖ). Add λdiss times Ldiss to the prediction objective. Use Vφ(x) = ||gφ(x)||² + δ||x||² with a small fixed δ to ensure nonnegativity. Set dₖ to the squared output error relative to the measured target, or use a separately optimized free-initial-state reference trajectory when comparing fixed and free solutions. Estimate ℓ_hat* as a stop-gradient exponential moving minimum of per-step losses; alternatively maintain an auxiliary free-initial-state rollout and use its average loss. Backpropagate through fθ and Vφ, but periodically freeze θ and evaluate dissipativity residuals on held-out sequences. The paper supplies the storage-function telescoping argument; the storage network and constants are learned or estimated. First experiment: compare an unconstrained MLP state-space model with the regularized model on noisy Duffing and Lorenz-63 data for one-step and 100-step prediction. Plot residuals, cumulative output error, and fixed/free initialization gaps versus horizon. The prediction is that average residual becomes nonpositive, cumulative squared deviation saturates or grows sublinearly, and the fixed/free gap remains bounded. Persistent positive residuals or linear cumulative growth falsify the proposed certificate.
Verification
Stage 1 · Toy mechanism gate: Failed ✗
Stage 2 · Mechanism transferred to benchmark: Not tested
Stage 2 · Practical benchmark result: Not run
Methodology: Toy-system gate first; the benchmark stage runs only after a pass. How verification works
Stage 1 — Mechanism check agent confidence 9/10
Built a compact Duffing neural state-space identification MVP with a nonnegative learned storage function, squared positive-part dissipativity penalty, 100-step rollout evaluation, and a direct telescoping sanity check. The math check passed numerically: maximum telescoping error was 7.1e-15 and the constructed certified bound had slack of about -20. In the fixed-seed mini-experiment, the dissipative model had worse MSE than the unconstrained baseline (0.1619 vs 0.0341 at 100 steps; 0.001406 vs 0.001326 at 10 steps), while 59.8% of residuals remained positive and mean residual was 0.01445, so the promised stability/accuracy effect was not observed.
- Agent confidence
- 9/10
- Baseline
- Duffing test MSE: 0.001326 at 10 steps, 0.034096 averaged over 100 steps; cumulative squared error 3.4096
- Idea
- Duffing test MSE: 0.001406 at 10 steps, 0.161861 averaged over 100 steps; cumulative squared error 16.1861; positive residual fraction 0.598; mean residual 0.01445
Limitations: Only a small damped Duffing toy system and one fixed random seed were tested; Lorenz-63, noisy-data sweeps, fixed/free initialization gaps, FLOPs, plots, hyperparameter searches, and longer training were not evaluated. The baseline residual fields are intentionally NaN because no storage certificate is defined for the baseline.
How to run: python3 experiment.py
Verdict computed by deterministic test code from paired-seed statistics — not by the language model.
Artifacts
- experiment.py 5.6 KB View Raw
- report.md 1.6 KB View
- results.json 0.7 KB View Raw