MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125229530 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2004.841740

Multirate robust digital control for fuzzy systems with periodic Lyapunov function

2005· article· en· W2125229530 on OpenAlexaff
Li‐Sheng Hu, Biao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMathematical Control Systems and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLyapunov functionControl theory (sociology)Fuzzy control systemLyapunov redesignFuzzy logicComputer scienceControl systemFunction (biology)MathematicsLyapunov equationControl (management)Lyapunov exponentArtificial intelligenceNonlinear systemEngineeringChaoticPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sampled-data control which is capable of stabilizing general nonlinear systems is of great current interest. In this paper, the Takagi-Sugeno (TS) fuzzy model is used to represent the nonlinear plant. The paper is primarily concerned with designing digital controllers for the TS fuzzy continuous-time model to stabilize the closed-loop system. In the problem formulation, we only assume that the sampled values at a sampling rate of (1/T/sub s/) are available for control. Within the sampling intervals, the fuzzy controller uses the sampled data at the sampling instants to fire a fuzzy rule and generate a digital control action series. This digital control action is then fed into the nonlinear system through a zero-order-holder. In this paper, two kinds of digital controllers are designed: Multirate and single-rate digital controllers. Within a sampling interval, the single-rate controller is static, while the multirate controller is periodically time-varying, i.e., the control action is switched at a small switching period T. Clearly, for the single-rate case, this switching period T is equal to the sampling period T/sub s/. This paper presents a design procedure for the multirate fuzzy controller with the single-rate control as a special case. The results are formulated as linear matrix inequalities. Numerical example shows the effectiveness of the proposed design procedures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy SystemsSame topicMathematical Control Systems and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207