Skip to content

Tail-Risk-Aware Model Predictive Control for Hypoglycemia Mitigation in Automated Insulin Delivery

Oct 2026 · Metabolites · 34 references
Diabetes Management and Research

Abstract

Background: Automated insulin delivery must maintain glycemic control despite partial observability, physiological heterogeneity, and sensing and actuation errors. Cohort-average metrics may nevertheless conceal hypoglycemia in vulnerable virtual patients. Methods: We developed a tail-risk-aware model predictive control framework that combines a Transformer-based latent world model, unguided iterative cross-entropy method planning over perturbed rollouts, and a deterministic Safety Layer that projects insulin actions onto programmed bounds. Reinforcement-learning-guided proposal sampling was evaluated separately as an exploratory search variant. The primary controller was evaluated in Simglucose using 10 virtual patients, three random seeds, and five prespecified operating conditions. Results: Under nominal conditions, it achieved a cohort-average time in range (TIR) of 77.6% and time below range (TBR) of 3.8%, but worst-k TBR was 11.0% and increased to 37.4% under 5% random CGM missingness. In the risk-objective ablation, combining variance penalization with TailMean increased TIR by 2.8 percentage points and reduced cohort-average and worst-k TBR by 2.3 and 7.4 percentage points, respectively, relative to mean-only planning. The Safety Layer modified every proposed action in the analyzed run, indicating strong dependence on the programmed bounds. Conclusions: These results show that average target attainment can coexist with substantial patient-level risk. They support tail-aware evaluation and identify patient-specific safeguards as a priority for future validation, but do not establish clinical safety or efficacy.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2016

“Failures” to be celebrated: an analysis of major pivots of software startups

This study conducts a case survey study based on the secondary data of the major pivots happened in 49 software startups, and demonstrates that customer need pivot is the most common among all pivot types.

Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc et al. · 127 citations · ⚡15
#machine learning Review Open access May 2016

Key Challenges in Software Startups Across Life Cycle Stages

It is found that what perceived as biggest challenges by software startups do vary across different life cycle stages, even though its significance decreases when the learning focuses of the startups move from problem to solution and their products mature.

Xiaofeng Wang, Henry Edison, Sohaib Shahid Bajwa et al. · 62 citations · ⚡6

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.