On the application of fuzzy predictive control based on multiple models strategy to a tubular heat exchanger system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the paper presented here is to control the fluid temperature that flows in the inner tube of a tubular heat exchanger system by means of the fluid flow pressure. This system in its present form has a specified range of the coefficients’ variation, while the temperature of the outlet fluid could generally be controlled by either the temperature or the flow of the inlet fluid flowing in the shell tube. The control realization for the system presented is often complicated, because the variation of the system coefficients and the reference signal must be thoroughly covered by the control action. In such a case, the system behaviour must first be represented by the multiple explicit models and then the appropriate control approach needs to be realized based on new techniques. A novel multiple models control strategy using both fuzzy-based predictive control (FPC) and overall fuzzy-based predictive model (OFPM) has been proposed in this paper. Concerning the strategy, the system must be modelled through the multiple OFPMs, while the corresponding FPCs need to be designed based on the model results. Hereinafter, the best OFPM of the system is accurately identified by an intelligent decision mechanism (IDM), as long as the system coefficients are abruptly varied, at each instant of time. Subsequently, the best FPC is chosen by the IDM and therefore its control action is applied to the system. In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed strategy, simulations are carried out and the corresponding results are compared with those obtained using the well-known single model linear generalized predictive controller (SMLGPC), where the observer polynomial so-called T- polynomial is used to cope with the better disturbance rejection properties. By analysing the proposed control strategy performance in comparison with the SMLGPC, when the system coefficients and the desired set point are abruptly changed, it is easily observed that the new acquired performance is as good as the SMLGPC, where it is well known as a powerful control approach in the linear model-based predictive control family.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".