MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481489270 · doi:10.1002/9781118341704.ch17

New PI Controller Tuning Methods Using Multi‐Objective Optimization

2013· other· en· W1481489270 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPID controllerPiControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceMathematicsControl engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, new tuning methods are developed for a PI controller for processes represented by a first-order plus dead time transfer function. The developed methods involve approximating the Pareto domain associated with the minimization of three performance criteria: integral of time-weighted absolute error, integral of squares of differences in the manipulated variable and settling time. Two tuning methods were developed, achieving optimal controller performance by specifying either one of the controller parameters or the desired values of the performance criteria. The developed controller tuning methods were compared with several previously developed controller correlations. Finally, the tuning methods were applied to a fourth-order process subjected to a set point change and a disturbance, and demonstrated excellent performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Control Systems DesignFrench-language works237,207