MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505206656 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2005.1557041

Experimental Examination of Controller Performance versus

2006· article· en· W1505206656 on OpenAlexaff
Kiff, C. N. Regier, J.K. Pieper

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen-loop controllerControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Control engineeringComputer scienceState (computer science)Set (abstract data type)Full state feedbackControl (management)EngineeringClosed loopArtificial intelligenceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Choosing the type of controller to use for a particular application is not trivial. This choice is often made heuristically by the design engineer. It is normally based on experience and qualitative examination of the open-loop and desired closed-loop system characteristics. This paper examines a state feedback controller, a state feedback controller with an integral state, a model-following controller, and a model-reference adaptive controller as they are applied to position control for a DC motor. The controllers are evaluated using cost functions for both performance and control effort. This type of analysis can help the designer determine which controller should be selected to accomplish a particular set of control objectives

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear SystemsFrench-language works237,207