# arXiv eess.SY: Generalizable Output Feedback Optimal Control via Transformers Without Explicit State Estimation [Canonical reading](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/arxiv-eess-sy-generalizable-output-feedback-optimal-control-via-77e5a234) The authors ask whether one learned policy can control a family of partially observed, noisy linear systems, rather than designing a separate controller for each plant. They report a transformer trained to imitate optimal LQG control across systems whose dimensions, cost matrices and noise levels vary. At run time, it uses a short window of noisy measurements to produce a control action, without plant matrices or a state estimator. The authors evaluate the policy on 28 simulated systems: for seen systems, the median gap from optimal cost is 0.4%; for unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to 1.0%. Their approach makes a shared controller across varied systems the central idea, but the reported results are from simulations, and the unseen-system result includes fine-tuning. Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims. ## Original source arXiv eess.SY · Article Original source date: Nov 9, 2026 (2026-11-09). Date basis: Date basis not provided. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-10T16:02:34.341Z. First observed: 2026-11-10T08:33:42.868Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-10T16:01:22.718Z. - [Generalizable Output Feedback Optimal Control via Transformers Without Explicit State Estimation](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Limits The reported evaluation is on 28 simulated systems; the evidence does not establish performance on physical systems. The reported median gap for unseen systems follows a light fine-tuning step; the abstract gives no result for unseen systems without fine-tuning. ## Open question How does the policy perform on unseen systems without the light fine-tuning step? ## Source-stated The paper asks whether one learned policy can serve a family of partially observed, noisy linear systems, instead of designing a separate controller for each plant. > Can one learned policy serve a whole family of partially observed, noisy linear systems? - [Supporting source](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Source-stated The authors train one transformer to imitate optimal LQG control on varied systems and report that it uses a short window of noisy measurements at run time, without plant matrices or a state estimator. > At run time, a short window of noisy measurements is all the policy needs to produce a control action, with no plant matrices and no state estimator. - [Supporting source](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Source-stated In evaluations on 28 simulated systems, the policy reaches a median gap of 0.4% from optimal cost for seen systems; for unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to 1.0%. > The trained policy reaches the optimal cost to within a median gap of $0.4\\%$ for seen systems. For unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to $1.0\\%$. - [Supporting source](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Source and contributor context AL-Sunni, Maitham F., Mohaya, Turki Bin, Dolan, John M., Seiler, Peter · Article author These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage. ## Source media No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## Fine-tuning Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use. - [Definition reference](https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/glossary#fine-tuning) ## arXiv arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed. - [Explore this context](/entities/arxiv) - [Reference](https://arxiv.org/) - [Reference](https://info.arxiv.org/help/api/index.html) ## TIME TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services. - [Explore this context](/entities/time) - [Reference](https://time.com/) ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: bd6011d2-f85a-4164-8eb1-c5f211e465bf. Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna. Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-10T16:02:34.341Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material\_development. Observation: 05ad505883344c9ef0eba3fd7f41e6ee1f71207ac6c4323d98ff7569e42603b0. Source text hash: c673df85a4c92cb48c59d4b13a0626cdea9e337f75e228e88fff2cdd95f4c25e. ## Revision and source-check history ### Version 1 — 2026-11-10T16:02:34.341Z The authors ask whether one learned policy can control a family of partially observed, noisy linear systems, rather than designing a separate controller for each plant. They report a transformer trained to imitate optimal LQG control across systems whose dimensions, cost matrices and noise levels vary. At run time, it uses a short window of noisy measurements to produce a control action, without plant matrices or a state estimator. The authors evaluate the policy on 28 simulated systems: for seen systems, the median gap from optimal cost is 0.4%; for unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to 1.0%. Their approach makes a shared controller across varied systems the central idea, but the reported results are from simulations, and the unseen-system result includes fine-tuning. ## Original source arXiv eess.SY · Article Original source date: Nov 9, 2026 (2026-11-09). Date basis: Date basis not provided. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-10T16:02:34.341Z. First observed: 2026-11-10T08:33:42.868Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-10T16:01:22.718Z. - [Generalizable Output Feedback Optimal Control via Transformers Without Explicit State Estimation](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Limits The reported evaluation is on 28 simulated systems; the evidence does not establish performance on physical systems. The reported median gap for unseen systems follows a light fine-tuning step; the abstract gives no result for unseen systems without fine-tuning. ## Open question How does the policy perform on unseen systems without the light fine-tuning step? ## Source-stated The paper asks whether one learned policy can serve a family of partially observed, noisy linear systems, instead of designing a separate controller for each plant. > Can one learned policy serve a whole family of partially observed, noisy linear systems? - [Supporting source](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Source-stated The authors train one transformer to imitate optimal LQG control on varied systems and report that it uses a short window of noisy measurements at run time, without plant matrices or a state estimator. > At run time, a short window of noisy measurements is all the policy needs to produce a control action, with no plant matrices and no state estimator. - [Supporting source](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Source-stated In evaluations on 28 simulated systems, the policy reaches a median gap of 0.4% from optimal cost for seen systems; for unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to 1.0%. > The trained policy reaches the optimal cost to within a median gap of $0.4\\%$ for seen systems. For unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to $1.0\\%$. - [Supporting source](https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.11815) ## Source and contributor context AL-Sunni, Maitham F., Mohaya, Turki Bin, Dolan, John M., Seiler, Peter · Article author These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage. ## Source media No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## Fine-tuning Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use. - [Definition reference](https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/glossary#fine-tuning) ## arXiv arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed. - [Explore this context](/entities/arxiv) - [Reference](https://arxiv.org/) - [Reference](https://info.arxiv.org/help/api/index.html) ## TIME TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services. - [Explore this context](/entities/time) - [Reference](https://time.com/) ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: bd6011d2-f85a-4164-8eb1-c5f211e465bf. Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna. Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-10T16:02:34.341Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material\_development. Observation: 05ad505883344c9ef0eba3fd7f41e6ee1f71207ac6c4323d98ff7569e42603b0. Source text hash: c673df85a4c92cb48c59d4b13a0626cdea9e337f75e228e88fff2cdd95f4c25e. ### uncertain — 2026-11-10T16:02:34.341Z — anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 Publication: bd6011d2-f85a-4164-8eb1-c5f211e465bf attribution — pass: The reading attributes the question, method and results to the paper's authors with phrases like 'The authors ask' and 'They report'. It does not present the results as independently verified. The arXiv publisher and title match the evidence. > Authors:Maitham F. AL-Sunni, Turki Bin Mohaya, John M. Dolan, Peter Seiler summary — uncertain: The summary is faithful, but key terms are never explained in plain language: 'plant' (the physical system being controlled), LQG, 'state estimator', 'cost matrices' and 'partially observed'. Readers outside control engineering may not grasp the development. The significance line, 'makes a shared controller across varied systems the central idea', restates the method rather than saying why it matters. Smallest repair: add one plain clause defining plant and LQG, and say the policy acts without being given a model of the specific system. The question about unseen systems without fine-tuning is fair and follows from the evidence. > Classical optimal control is used to design a separate controller for each plant. date — pass: originalPublished is 2026-11-09. This matches the v1 submission date on the arXiv page, not the later feed date of 2026-11-10. > \[Submitted on 9 Nov 2026\] support — pass: Each claim matches the abstract, including the 28 simulated systems, the 0.4% median gap for seen systems and the 1.0% median gap for unseen systems after light fine-tuning. The limitations correctly note simulation-only evaluation and the fine-tuning condition. They do not invent benefits or costs. > For unseen systems, a light fine-tuning step brings the median gap to $1.0\\%$. media — pass: The selected media is the verified direct link to the original arXiv abstract page, which is the source itself. No other media was found. ## Recorded references Explicit citations in public readings and public file attachments to this reading. Shared topics are not citations. Other artifact types need an explicit reference adapter. No public references recorded here yet. [Reference data (JSON)](/readings/77e5a23481923a75378f01ab54312e7ee83e1c5dfca3fe09e0527ae0da1b79f1/references.json) ## Corrections and challenges [Send a correction or an opposing source](https://escapemeridian.com/corrections/) [JSON record](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/arxiv-eess-sy-generalizable-output-feedback-optimal-control-via-77e5a234.json)