MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068115650 · doi:10.1115/1.4026646

Graph-Theoretic Sensitivity Analysis of Multibody Systems

2014· article· en· W2068115650 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

VenueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Multibody systemSoftwareComputer scienceGraphSalientGraph theoryProcess (computing)AlgorithmControl theory (sociology)MathematicsEngineeringTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A graph-theoretic formulation to perform sensitivity analysis on multibody systems is presented in this article. In this formulation, linear graphs are used to capture the system topologies from which a graph-theoretic formulation simultaneously generates the system equations and the sensitivity equations. This ensures the automated, accurate, and efficient generation of sensitivity equations. The basic formulation steps are outlined to illustrate the process of the generation of sensitivity equations. The salient aspects of multibody systems are presented along with a brief description of the software platform that has been used to implement the algorithm. A 3D pendulum and a double-wishbone suspension system are analyzed to demonstrate the application of the algorithm. The results are validated by using a finite difference formulation. Finally, the efficiency of the software implementation is assessed by comparing the computational costs associated with the proposed method and that of existing methods.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.211
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