MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117794352 · doi:10.1109/acc.2006.1657586

Multi-layer switching structure with periodic feedback control

2006· article· en· W2117794352 on OpenAlexaff
Shauheen Zahirazami, Idin Karuei, Amir G. Aghdam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Control of Uncertain Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Transient (computer programming)Computer scienceComputationTransient responseSet (abstract data type)LTI system theoryLayer (electronics)Transfer functionControl systemFunction (biology)Linear systemControl (management)MathematicsAlgorithmEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel switching control architecture for linear time-invariant (LTI) systems using generalized sampled-data hold functions (GSHF) is proposed to reduce the magnitude of the transient response. It is assumed that the plant model belongs to a finite set of known models. The output of the system is periodically sampled and a control signal is being generated by using a suitable hold function from a set of GSHFs. A control architecture consisting of a layer of high-performance GSHFs (one for each plant model) and some other layers of simultaneous stabilizing GSHFs is introduced. It is shown that using the above sets of GSHFs and a proper switching path, one can reduce the number of switchings to destabilizing GSHFs. As a result, the transient performance which is the main shortcoming of most switching control schemes is improved using the proposed strategy. Furthermore, it is shown that using GSHFs instead of continuous-time controllers reduces the complexity of online computations required to obtain the upperbound signals. Simulation results show the effectiveness of the proposed method in improving the transient performance

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStability and Control of Uncertain SystemsFrench-language works237,207