MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998463589 · doi:10.1115/fpmc2013-4451

Stability Analysis of QFT Controllers Designed for Hydraulic Actuators Using Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy Modeling Approach

2013· article· en· W1998463589 on OpenAlexaff
Masoumeh Esfandiari, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Quantitative feedback theoryController (irrigation)ActuatorFuzzy logicStability (learning theory)Fuzzy control systemParametric statisticsNonlinear systemControl engineeringHydraulic machineryHydraulic cylinderComputer scienceStability conditionsFuzzy setRobust controlMathematicsEngineeringControl systemControl (management)Artificial intelligencePhysicsDiscrete time and continuous time

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although, robust controllers that have been designed for hydraulic actuators based on quantitative feedback theory (QFT) have shown satisfactory performance, their stability is limited to certain set of inputs-outputs. This paper explores, for the first time, the stability of a QFT controller using stability theorem of Takagi-Sugeno (T-S) fuzzy systems. To do this, first the hydraulic closed-loop system is represented by a T-S fuzzy model that is formed through a nonlinear combination of some local linear models. Next, the stability of the resulting T-S fuzzy system is analyzed simply by stability analysis of its local linear models. This approach is used to study the stability of a QFT position controller previously developed for hydraulic actuators. Results show guaranteed stability of the QFT controller over a wide range of operation and in the presence of parametric uncertainties.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFuzzy Logic and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207