MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047815456 · doi:10.4271/2013-01-1722

Valve Lift Profile Development and Optimization Using Matlab

2013· article· en· W2047815456 on OpenAlexaff
Iain Cameron, Bruce Minaker

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Engines · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMATLABLift (data mining)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringAerospace engineeringMarine engineeringSimulationEngineeringData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of this paper is the development and modelling of a reverse-poppet valve train assembly, placing a major emphasis on the optimization routine used to develop a short-duration camshaft profile. A user-programmable script, known as the penalty function, was written to assign weighted numeric values to certain parameters associated with the valve lift profile and its derivatives. These design parameters include maximum acceleration, peak lift, area under the lift curve and minimization of jerk. Optimization tools built into Matlab were then used to generate a profile which minimizes the overall ‘penalty’ associated with each parameter as it deviates from a user-defined ideal. A commercially available multi-body dynamics software package was used to evaluate the dynamic performance of the valve train incorporating the generated cam profile. A flexible-body spring element provided insight into spring surge and coil contact. Comparisons of the designed and simulated lift, velocity and acceleration profiles are given.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of EnginesSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207