Complex System Engineering Simulation through Co-Simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of today's advanced simulation tools are suitable for modeling specific systems, but they provide rather limited support for automated model building and management. The diverse tools available for modeling different components of a vehicle make it all the more challenging to comprehend their integration and interactions and analyze the complete system. In addition, the complexities and sizes of the models require a better use of computing resources, such as multicore or remote processing, to greatly reduce the simulation time. In this paper we describe how modern software techniques can support modeling and design activities, with the objective to create system models quickly by assembling them in a “plug-and-play” architecture. System models can be integrated, co-simulated, and reused regardless of the environment in which they are developed, and their simulation results can be consolidated for analysis into a single tool. As an example, we show that such management is achievable by integrating the functionalities of Argonne National Laboratory's Autonomie® and Kiastek's CosiMate® modeling tools. We demonstrate these functionalities through a Simulink vehicle model communicating with detailed submodels in their expert tools such as GT Power, AMESim, Saber, or CarSim on separate core.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".