MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056402025 · doi:10.2514/6.2004-4338

H-inf Design and mu-Analysis Based Optimal Mapping of Sensors and Actuators in Flexible Structures

2004· article· en· W2056402025 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue10th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorComputer scienceControl engineeringControl theory (sociology)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a computationally efficient technique for the determination of the optimal size and spatial mapping of distributed actuators on a flexible structure to suppress vibrations in a H∞ control design framework. The cost of the computations required in the H∞ based optimization algorithm is reduced by using an efficient feasibility test. The feasibility test penalizes the candidates for the actuator size and locations resulting in the open-loop zeros remaining closer to the imaginary axes and passes the ones moving the open-loop zeros farther left of the imaginary axis. Then, by using only the candidates passing this feasibility test, optimization of the actuator size and placement can be performed using the H∞ based design and μ analysis. The optimal mapping technique presented in this study is demonstrated on a simple finite element based model of a flexible structure consisting of a cantilevered beam with two pairs of spatially non-collocated distributed actuators and a displacement sensor.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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