MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315405757 · doi:10.2514/6.2010-944

Fault-Tolerant Flight Control System Design by a Dual-Loop Control Strategy

2010· article· en· W2315405757 on OpenAlexafffund
Moein Mehrtash, Wenfang Xie, Youmin Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venue48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)Computer scienceFault toleranceControl (management)Loop (graph theory)Control systemDual loopControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringEngineeringDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a dual-loop control scheme for fault tolerant flight control system design. The dual-loop controller consists of an outer loop controller–so-called adaptive neural sliding mode control (ANSC) and an inner loop controller designed by using nonlinear dynamic inversion (NDI) technique. The merits of adaptive neural network and sliding mode control scheme are that 1) the ability of adaptive neural network control to deal with unstructured uncertainty and 2) the ability of sliding mode control to guarantee transient response. Using timescale separation principal, the aircraft dynamics can be decomposed into fast and slow dynamics and the decomposed dynamics are inversed for NDI controllers. For real-time pilot simulation, one-stage inverse dynamics is used and the pilot inputs are translated to roll, pitch and yaw rate commands. For cascade NDI, two-stage dynamic inversion is used. The stability analysis of the proposed controller is performed using Lyapunov theory. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed control scheme, numerical simulation is performed for six degree-of-freedom nonlinear aircraft model while a failure occurs in longitudinal control surface. Simulation results demonstrate that closedloop system has good performance while encountering lock-in-place, partial destruction and floating actuator failures. Nomenclature stick long δ , stick lat δ , stick dir δ = pilot inputs for longitudinal, lateral and directional command dir lon lat K K K , , = sticks and pedal gains ref p , ref q , ref r = reference model rate commands cmd z n , cmd y n = normal and lateral acceleration command

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace ExpositionSame topicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear SystemsFrench-language works237,207