MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000277833 · doi:10.1115/1.4001335

Design of Gain-Scheduled Strictly Positive Real Controllers Using Numerical Optimization for Flexible Robotic Systems

2010· article· en· W2000277833 on OpenAlexaff
James Richard Forbes, Christopher J. Damaren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGain schedulingControl theory (sociology)Parameterized complexityScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceOptimization problemPassivityMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematicsControl (management)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design of gain-scheduled strictly positive real (SPR) controllers using numerical optimization is considered. Our motivation is robust, yet accurate motion control of flexible robotic systems via the passivity theorem. It is proven that a family of very strictly passive compensators scheduled via time- or state-dependent scheduling signals is also very strictly passive. Two optimization problems are posed; we first present a simple method to optimize the linear SPR controllers, which compose the gain-scheduled controller. Second, we formulate the optimization problem associated with the gain-scheduled controller itself. Restricting our investigation to time-dependent scheduling signals, the signals are parameterized, and the optimization objective function seeks to find the form of the scheduling signals, which minimizes a combination of the manipulator tip tracking error and the control effort. A numerical example employing a two-link flexible manipulator is used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the optimal gain-scheduling algorithm. The closed-loop system performance is improved, and it is shown that the optimal scheduling signals are not necessarily linear.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations28
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207