MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Research and Application of Particle Swarm Optimization in Parameter Tuning on PID Controller

2013· article· en· W2070589928 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

VenueApplied Mechanics and Materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Design
Canadian institutionsLa Cité Collégiale
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPID controllerParticle swarm optimizationControl theory (sociology)MATLABGenetic algorithmController (irrigation)Control engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringAlgorithmControl (management)Temperature controlArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A design method of PID controller based on particle swarm algorithm is proposed to solve the difficult problems of parameter tuning on PID controller in automatic control system. And the specific experimental structure is also given. The transfer function of DC servo generator was found with identification of system parameters, and the PID parameters were searched by particle swarm algorithm. MATLAB simulation was used to demonstrate the feasibility and advantages of this approach. The simulation result was compared to the result of searching PID parameters based on genetic algorithm, and it is show that the seeking time to tune the PID parameters by using the particle swarm algorithm is faster than by using the genetic algorithm method.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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