MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135518146 · doi:10.1109/cca.1997.627706

Sensitivity of the continualization of poles and its effect in system identification

2002· article· en· W2135518146 on OpenAlexaff
C.A. Rabbath, N. Hori

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Control theory (sociology)Process (computing)Operator (biology)Representation (politics)Identification (biology)Computer sciencePole–zero plotDiscrete time and continuous timeTransformation (genetics)System identificationSampling (signal processing)Sampling intervalInterval (graph theory)Electromagnetic coilEstimation theoryAlgorithmMathematicsTransfer functionElectronic engineeringEngineeringData modelingFilter (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a continuous-time parameter identification process which uses a digital data acquisition system, the form in which the discrete-time model of the dynamic system is represented influences the performance of the estimation process. In this paper, it is shown that alternatives to the conventional representation of discrete-time systems, which uses the z operator, possess pole-transformation sensitivity magnitudes converging to unity as the sampling interval approaches zero, while that of the z form becomes unbounded. This fact is shown to influence the accuracy of continuous-time pole estimates and favors the use of alternatives to the widely-used z operator in practical implementations of discrete-time systems, as provided with experiments and simulations on a voice-coil-driven flexible positioner.

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)0.031
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207