Modeling and Control of Ball and Beam System using Model Based and Non-Model Based Control Approaches
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ball and beam system is a laboratory equipment with high nonlinearity in its dynamics. The aims of this research are to model the ball and beam system considering nonlinear factors and coupling effect and to design controllers to control the ball position. The LQR is designed considering two Degrees-of-Freedom and coupling dynamics. The parameters of the LQR are tuned using Genetic Algorithm (GA). Jacobian linearization method is used to linearize the system around operating-point. Due to the noise of the sensor in the experimental setup, a state observer is designed to observe the velocity of the ball. In order to compare the performance of the LQR and study the effect of simplifying assumptions, two control strategies are designed and implemented: Proportional Derivative Integral (PID) as non-model based control strategy, hybrid PID and Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) as combination of model based and non-model based control strategies. The experimental results of this research prove the model based control strategies outperforms the non-model based or hybrid controllers in a nonlinear and noisy ball and beam system. In addition, it is shown that the coupling dynamics cannot be eliminated as a simplifying assumption in designing the controller.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it