MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000544030 · doi:10.1115/detc2011-47946

Multi-Objective Optimization of a Segmented Lunar Wheel Concept

2011· article· en· W2000544030 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Faragalli, Damiano Pasini, Peter Radzizsewski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsConceptual designMulti-objective optimizationComputer scienceMATLABGenetic algorithmComponent (thermodynamics)Reliability (semiconductor)Finite element methodSet (abstract data type)Mathematical optimizationEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this work is to develop a systematic method for optimizing the structural design of a segmented wheel concept to improve its operating performance. In this study, a wheel concept is parameterized into a set of size and shape design variables, and a finite element model of the wheel component is created. A multi-objective optimization problem is formulated to optimize its directional compliance and reduce stress concentrations, which has a direct affect on the efficiency, traction, rider comfort, maneuverability, and reliability of the wheel. To solve the optimization problem, a Matlab-FE simulation loop is built and a multi-objective genetic algorithm is used to find the Pareto front of optimal solutions. A trade-off design is selected which demonstrates an improvement from the original concept. Finally, recommendations will be made to apply the structural optimization framework to alternative wheel conceptual designs.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207