MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037988540 · doi:10.1115/1.4024171

Automated Identification of a Mechatronic System Model Using Genetic Programming and Bond Graphs

2013· article· en· W2037988540 on OpenAlexaff
Saeed Behbahani, Clarence W. de Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechatronicsBond graphControl engineeringSystem identificationIdentification (biology)Nonlinear systemGenetic programmingComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)SoftwareNonlinear programmingController (irrigation)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceData modelingMathematicsSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling, identification (experimental modeling), and design of dynamic systems and the associated problem of controller design are common problems in the field of mechatronics. A typical mechatronic problem entails finding the best topology as well as parameter values of the desired solution. In view of dynamic interactions in a mechatronic system, which involves more than one domain, it is desirable to use concurrent and integrated methodology in the solution. The powerful search ability of genetic programming (GP) along with the domain independence and the open architecture of bond graph (BG) modeling can be integrated to develop an evolutionary mechatronic tool for identification of a complex mechatronic system. This paper extends this integrated approach to nonlinear mechatronic problems and develops a software tool for this purpose. It is illustrated how the developed technique and the corresponding software tool can be used in the automated synthesis and identification of a nonlinear mechatronic system. The performance of the software tool is validated by applying it to a nonlinear electrohydraulic manipulator, which falls into the class of multidomain systems. The results obtained from the application are quite encouraging, and form a rationale for the extension of the tool for concurrent and optimal design of mechatronic systems.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207