Clustered Causal Control Models for Dynamic Environment Adaptation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing techniques for determining control settings in dynamic environments are limited by the need for a priori knowledge, inefficiency in resource usage, and slow adaptation to changing conditions, leading to sub-optimal control and potential deviations from safe settings.

Innovation Solution

A control system that automatically generates causal knowledge through recursive experimentation, adjusting internal parameters to optimize control settings in real-time, using clustering and probabilistic models to adapt to environmental changes and ensure efficient, safe operation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If modeling-based techniques are used to determine control settings, then the system can passively observe historical data and learn patterns, but the system requires a priori knowledge and adapts slowly to changing conditions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptation speedVSAvoidtime for learning and optimization
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic causal models that are continuously updated as new data becomes available, allowing the system to adapt to changing environmental conditions in real-time rather than relying on static historical patterns. The causal model structure evolves dynamically to reflect current system behavior

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback loops where environment responses to selected control settings are fed back into the causal model for continuous updating. This closed-loop feedback mechanism enables rapid adaptation by constantly refining causal relationships based on observed outcomes

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Productivity

If active control techniques are used for knowledge generation, then the system can actively control the environment for experimentation, but the system uses more resources and requires more data

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelearning efficiencyVSAvoiddata requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial experimentation by selectively intervening only on specific procedural instances where causal relationships need clarification, rather than universally experimenting across all instances. This partial action approach reduces data requirements while maintaining learning efficiency

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system segments the environment into procedural instances and applies different control strategies to different segments. By clustering instances and applying targeted active control only where needed, the system reduces overall data requirements while maintaining productive learning

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Adaptability or versatility

If the system continuously updates causal models for all procedural instances, then the system can adapt to environmental changes, but the computational complexity and resource usage increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereal-time adaptationVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments procedural instances into clusters based on shared characteristics, and maintains separate causal models only for each cluster rather than for every individual instance. This segmentation dramatically reduces computational complexity while preserving real-time adaptation capabilities

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system creates universal causal models at the cluster level that serve multiple procedural instances simultaneously. Each cluster-level causal model functions universally for all instances within that cluster, reducing overall computational burden while maintaining adaptability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Productivity

If the system explores new control settings to optimize performance, then the system can improve system performance, but the system may deviate from safe ranges and produce sub-optimal control periods

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem performanceVSAvoidsafe operation
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent incorporates safety constraints as feedback boundaries that guide the exploration process. When exploring new control settings, the system uses feedback from safety monitors to prevent deviations beyond acceptable ranges, ensuring reliable operation while still enabling performance optimization

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system carefully manages parameter changes during exploration by making small, controlled adjustments to control settings rather than large leaps. This gradual parameter change approach allows performance optimization while maintaining safety margins and reducing the risk of sub-optimal control periods

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS12422797B2Determining causal models for controlling environments
Publication Date: 2025.09.23 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES CO
  • US12422797B2 patent drawing
  • US12422797B2 patent drawing
  • US12422797B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on a computer storage medium, for determining causal models for controlling environments. One of the methods includes identifying a procedural instance; selecting control settings for the procedural instance, comprising, for a particular one of the controllable elements: assigning the procedural instance to a cluster for the particular controllable element in accordance with current values of a set of clustering parameters for the particular controllable element; and selecting a setting for the particular controllable element for the procedural instances based on a causal model that is specific to the cluster; obtaining environment responses to the selected control settings that define a value of the performance metric for the procedural instance; and updating, for the particular controllable element, the causal model for the cluster for the controllable element to which the procedural instance was assigned based on the value of the performance metric.