Stability conditions in decentralized active vibration control of a flexible plate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the analysis of decentralized active control of periodic panel vibration using multiple pairs combining PZT actuators and PVDF sensors distributed (not necessarily collocated) on the panel. Frequency-domain gradient and Newton-Raphson adaptation of decentralized control were analyzed, both in terms of performance and stability conditions. The stabilization of the closed loop by adjusting the convergence coefficient was especially investigated through an adjustable control effort term in the quadratic cost function. Various necessary or sufficient stability conditions derived from the transfer matrix were obtained and ranked from the most restrictive to the less restrictive condition. One of them, the strictly positive real condition of the transfer matrix, appears to be very useful. This stability condition is obtained when the open-loop system is dissipative. Simulation and experimental results are presented for a simply supported panel with 4 PZT-PVDF pairs distributed on the panel. The experimental results were obtained with a decentralized harmonic controller demonstrated equivalent to any narrow-band disturbance control methods. Decentralized vibration control is shown to be highly dependent of the actuator and sensor configurations, but can be as effective as a fully centralized control even when the transfer matrix is not diagonal-dominant.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".