MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990058541 · doi:10.1109/icict.2013.6732788

Design and comparison of type-1 and interval type-2 fuzzy gain scheduling controllers for ball and beam system

2013· article· en· W1990058541 on OpenAlexaff
Umar Farooq, Jason Gu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Gain schedulingFuzzy logicMATLABComputer scienceFuzzy control systemBall (mathematics)Control engineeringEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents the design and comparison of type-1 and interval type-2 fuzzy logic controllers for ball and beam system. Both the controllers utilize the beam angle as a scheduling variable for the stabilization and tracking of the ball position. The performance of the controllers is analyzed by simulating them in MATLAB environment for various initial conditions and in the presence of disturbance signals. It is shown that interval type-2 fuzzy gain scheduling controller has a better response and disturbance rejection capability as compared to type-1 fuzzy and conventional pole placement 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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFuzzy Logic and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207