MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062484729 · doi:10.1109/imtc.1997.604013

Model predictive controller design with process constraints and implicit economic criteria [gasoline blending]

2002· article· en· W2062484729 on OpenAlexaff
Jasmin Patry, Thomas E. Marlin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)PID controllerOpen-loop controllerComputer scienceController (irrigation)Profit (economics)Model predictive controlProcess controlControl engineeringProcess (computing)EngineeringTemperature controlControl (management)Artificial intelligenceEconomicsClosed loop

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for designing a QDMC (Quadratic/Dynamic Matrix Control) controller is developed such that, at steady-state, it will maintain the process near the economic optimum, without explicitly calculating profit as part of its objective function. The method for designing the QDMC controller involves selecting the adjustable parameters of the QDMC controller such that the total profit is maximized for a given set of disturbances; this set of disturbances acts as a "training set" for the controller. The steady-state performance of an optimally-tuned QDMC controller was compared against both the optimum profit case and multi-loop PID control of a gasoline blending process with five manipulated and three controlled variables. The QDMC controller outperformed the multi-loop PID controller both in economic performance and in the size of its operating window. Furthermore, the QDMC controller achieved no less than 99.3% of the optimum total profit for both disturbance sets examined.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207