1: \begin{abstract}

2: In this work, we compare the direct and indirect approaches

3: to data-driven predictive control of stochastic linear

4: time-invariant systems. The distinction between the two approaches lies in the fact

5: that the indirect approach involves identifying a lower dimensional 

6: model from data which is then used in a certainty-equivalent control design, 

7: while the direct approach avoids this intermediate step altogether.

8: Working within an optimization-based framework,

9: we find that the suboptimality gap measuring the control performance 

10: w.r.t. the optimal model-based control design vanishes with the size of the dataset only with the direct approach. 

11: The indirect approach has a higher rate of

12: convergence, but its suboptimality gap does not vanish

13: as the size of the dataset increases. 

14: This reveals the existence of two distinct regimes of performance

15: as the size of the dataset of input-output behaviors is increased.

16: We show that the indirect approach, by relying on the identification 

17: of a lower dimensional model, has lower variance and 

18: outperforms the direct approach for smaller datasets, 

19: while it incurs an asymptotic bias as a result of the process noise 

20: and a (possibly) incorrect assumption on the order of the identified model. 

21: The direct approach, however, does not incur an asymptotic bias, and outperforms 

22: the indirect approach for larger datasets. 

23: Ultimately, by revealing the existence of two non-asymptotic regimes 

24: for the performance of direct and indirect data-driven predictive

25: control designs, our study suggests that neither approach is invariably 

26: superior and that the choice of design must, in practice, be informed 

27: by the available dataset.

28: \end{abstract}

29: