MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146562926 · doi:10.1109/med.2013.6608790

Intersection-based piecewise affine approximation of nonlinear systems

2013· article· en· W2146562926 on OpenAlexafffund
A.H. Zavieh, Luís Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLinearizationApproximation errorFunction approximationMathematicsApproximation algorithmNonlinear systemApplied mathematicsIntersection (aeronautics)Approximation theoryLinear approximationPiecewiseMathematical optimizationFunction (biology)Computer scienceMathematical analysisArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new algorithm for piecewise affine (PWA) approximation of nonlinear systems. Such an approximation is very important to enable a reduction in the complexity of models of nonlinear systems while keeping the global validity of the models. The paper builds on previous work on PWA approximation methods, in particular on the work done by Casselman and Rodrigues, known as the Set of Linearization Points (SLP) PWA approximation. The proposed extension method can be used to approximate any continuous function of one variable by a PWA function. The algorithm is based on the points at which the linearization lines intersect with each other. The method assumes that a desired approximation error and one linearization point are given. The algorithm then performs several linearizations. It is shown that the new linearization points are optimal in the sense of decreasing the error between the exact function and the approximation. The main advantages of this methodology compared to previous approaches are the reduction of the number of pieces of the PWA function, the guarantee that the approximation is continuous, elimination of the numerical optimization to find the point of maximum error, and that the derivative of the approximation and the derivative of the exact function are equal at all linearization points.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.172
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207