MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067801031 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450790518

Multi‐controller scheme for load rejection and set‐point tracking

2001· article· en· W2067801031 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Design
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Feed forwardController (irrigation)Compensation (psychology)RealizabilityComputer scienceLoad rejectionScheme (mathematics)Open-loop controllerSet (abstract data type)Tracking (education)Control engineeringControl (management)EngineeringMathematicsClosed loopArtificial intelligenceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To acheive complete compensation for loads, a novel multi‐controller scheme with feedforward control is proposed. This scheme has four controllers, a set‐point controller, two load controllers, and a feedforward controller. This results in the separation of the load response from the set‐point response in a closed‐loop system. These four controllers can then be designed independently to achieve good system performance for both set‐point tracking and load rejection. One of the load controllers can be chosen as a proportional controller; this guarantees physical realizability and provides excellent compensation. The results of simulation and real time control show that the proposed multi‐controller scheme is superior to a double‐controller system and a Smith predictor in the presence of large uncertainty in process dynamics especially for load disturbances.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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