MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

INTEGRATION OF SENSOR AND ACTUATOR FAILURE DETECTION, IDENTIFICATION, AND ACCOMMODATION SCHEMES WITHIN FAULT TOLERANT CONTROL LAWS

2007· article· en· W2063123884 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mario Perhinschi, Marcello R. Napolitano, Giampiero Campa, Mario Luca Fravolini, Brad Seanor

Bibliographic record

VenueControl and Intelligent Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorAccommodationIdentification (biology)Fault toleranceLawControl (management)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Political scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the design of a fault tolerant scheme for coping with both sensor and actuator failures within a flight control system. The failure detection and identification scheme is based on the use of neural estimators interfaced with correlation functions of the aircraft angular rates. Particular emphasis is placed on the differentiation between sensor and actuator failures. The failure types considered are actuator blockage along with partial/total loss of aerodynamic efficiency of the control surface and angular rate sensor step-type failure. The design of the accommodating control laws for actuator failures is based upon a non-linear dynamic inversion approach with neural network augmentation. The accommodation of sensor failures is performed by replacing the failed sensor output with neural estimates computed as part of the detection and identification process. The performance of the scheme is evaluated using the non-linear simulator for the NASA Intelligent Flight Control System F-15 aircraft developed at West Virginia University. The simulation results confirm the capabilities of the scheme to handle both sensor and actuator failures of different types over a large range of magnitudes.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations26
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueControl and Intelligent SystemsSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207