Talk:Linear–quadratic–Gaussian control

Assessment comment
Substituted at 22:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Missing brackets?
In the equation for $$P_{i+1}$$ for the discrete time case, is there a pair of square brackets missing around $$\left( {\mathbf{x}}_0 - \hat{\mathbf{x}}_0\right)\left({\mathbf{x}}_0- \hat{\mathbf{x}}_0\right)^\mathrm T$$ when calculating the expected value? Or should the expected value be calculated as $$E \left[ {\mathbf{x}}_0 - \hat{\mathbf{x}}_0\right]\left({\mathbf{x}}_0- \hat{\mathbf{x}}_0\right)^\mathrm T$$?


 * Fixed. Loraof (talk) 19:57, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 26 October 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Handled as an uncontroversial request (non-admin closure) — Andy W. ( talk ) 02:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Linear-quadratic-Gaussian control → Linear–quadratic–Gaussian control – This term should make use of en-dashes and not hyphens. For some reason though, I don't seem to be able to make the move myself; perhaps Wikipedia considers the two titles identical. If that is the case, this behavior should be changed so that Wikipedia doesn't consider the two titles to be identical (because they're not). —Kri (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per MOS:ENDASH. My guess is that you'll need to rename to some third title, then re-rename to add the en-dashes. Sneftel (talk) 17:32, 27 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Thank you for going ahead and making this page title change. Normative page titles are a big part of the Wikipedia value add to the larger world. It's almost a poor man's de facto manual of style. We can't always get it right, but we can usually get it not wrong. &mdash; MaxEnt 23:30, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Lead flagged for tone
The slightly excessive use of italic for emphasis, and several uses of "i.e." lend the lead a slightly OR flavour. This is partly because the lead is making an effort to be substantive. More articles should have this kind of small problem. &mdash; MaxEnt 23:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Loraof (talk) 19:57, 27 December 2018 (UTC)