MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114812395 · doi:10.1109/cca.1997.627461

MATLAB tools for linear and nonlinear system stability theorem implementation

2002· article· en· W2114812395 on OpenAlexaff
James Taylor, C.P. Chan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNyquist stability criterionMATLABNonlinear systemCircle criterionComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Small-gain theoremLTI system theoryStability (learning theory)ZoomFeedback linearizationNyquist plotNyquist–Shannon sampling theoremLinear systemMathematicsExponential stabilityMathematical analysisEngineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer visionParametric statisticsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three MATLAB-based tools have been developed for the convenient assessment of stability conditions for linear and nonlinear systems. The first is a more helpful and definitive version of Nyquist, which has features of automatic zooming (to show all crossings of the real axis and thus display the corresponding critical gain points) and which displays on the real axis a numeral ('0', '1', etc.) that represents the number of unstable (right-half plane) poles that will occur in a closed-loop system with feedback gain k if the point -1/k is located in that region. The second tool is built on this extended Nyquist command, and makes the application of the nonlinear time-varying system circle criterion equally simple and definitive. Finally, a Popov criterion tool is included to achieve better sector bounds for the nonlinear time-invariant case. Examples are presented to show the efficacy of these extensions within the MATLAB environment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1170.063

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207