Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2609.02363

On the invariance of risk-sensitive LQR gain under input randomization

Abstract

This paper shows that the optimal gain of the risk-sensitive linear quadratic regulator (LQR) problem is invariant under input randomization, i.e., when the controller deliberately injects noise into the nominal control input. This appears counterintuitive at first glance because certainty equivalence does not hold for risk-sensitive LQR and input randomization inflates the effective process noise. Nonetheless, the gain is preserved because the input noise enters not only the system dynamics but also the cost functional, and its total effect on the gain eventually vanishes. Consequently, the optimal gain and its associated Riccati recursion need not be recomputed, and the increment in the optimal cost can be readily evaluated in closed form. This result facilitates the use of risk-sensitive LQR in applications that employ input randomization for privacy or exploration, such as watermarking for replay attack detection, differential privacy, and path integral control.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yeongjun Jang. 2026-09-02. On the invariance of risk-sensitive LQR gain under input randomization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02363

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

A simple derivation of the Kalman filter

In this lecture note, we present a concise and self-contained derivation of the discrete-time Kalman filter equations that requires only a basic understanding of least squares estimation. The treatment is designed to minimize mathematical overhead while preserving both rigor and generality.

math.OC

Comment on "Event-Triggered Stabilization of Linear Time-Delay Systems via Halanay-Type Inequality"

This comment revisits Lemma 1 in [1], which plays a central role in the event-triggered stabilization analysis developed therein. We identify technical gaps in the proof of the lemma and provide a corrected argument. In particular, careful treatment of the exponentially decaying term shows that its decay rate must be retained in the resulting convergence estimate. The statement of the original lemma, with the exponential decay rate determined by the minimum of the characteristic decay rate and the decay rate of this term, remains valid.

math.OC