MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982667413 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20318

Trajectory planning for grade transitions: A restricted form approach

2010· article· en· W1982667413 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Walther Gilbert, Michael Lipsett, J. Fraser Forbes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSyncrude
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)TrajectoryComputer scienceTrajectory optimizationMathematical optimizationTransient (computer programming)Scheme (mathematics)Process (computing)Control theory (sociology)Simple (philosophy)Control (management)Optimal controlOptimization problemAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Trajectory planning is of importance for controlling chemical processes under transient conditions. Many of the available techniques for trajectory optimization yield solutions that cannot be implemented. Furthermore, many transient processes are operated manually, which further reduces the classes of trajectories that may be used. In this article, input trajectories are restricted to step/ramp functions, which are easily implemented by manual control or simple control schemes. Direct transcription of the dynamic optimization problem was used to allow the solution to be found using algebraic optimization techniques. The proposed method serves as a useful control policy evaluation tool, where comparison of unrestricted and restricted trajectories gives insights into the gains associated with adopting a more sophisticated control scheme. The restricted inputs approach is applied to several benchmark problems, including gravity separation in an oilsands process.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207