MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981478437 · doi:10.1191/0142331205tm152oa

Control design to shape the stationary probability density function

2005· article· en· W1981478437 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael G. Forbes, J. Fraser Forbes, Martin Guay

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProbability density functionControl theory (sociology)Process (computing)Dimension (graph theory)Controller (irrigation)Focus (optics)Function (biology)MathematicsSet (abstract data type)Applied mathematicsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationControl (management)Artificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends a regulatory controller synthesis technique that was previously introduced for first-order processes to higher-order processes. The target of the design is to find a feedback control law such that the multivariate stationary probability density function (PDF) for the closed-loop process reasonably approximates a preselected target PDF. With the idea already motivated and introduced in previous work, the focus of this paper is on dealing with the various complications that arise when the process dimension is greater than one. As in the previous case, the main idea of multivariate PDF-shaping is to reduce the integral equation that governs the relationship between process dynamics and stationary PDF to a set of algebraic equations. The proposed approach relies on parameterization of the feedback control law to simplify manipulation of the integral equation. Numerical simulations with an example process are used to demonstrate application of the technique.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Institute of Measurement and ControlSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207