MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318352630 · doi:10.1115/imece2015-51255

Parameter Identification of LuGre Friction Model: Experimental Set-up Design and Measurement

2015· article· en· W2318352630 on OpenAlexaff
Yun-Hsiang Sun, Tao Chen, Cyrus Shafai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Dynamical frictionCompensation (psychology)Range (aeronautics)Control theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Work (physics)Set (abstract data type)Experimental dataLagComputer scienceControl engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringControl (management)Materials scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work proposes a simple but general experimental approach including the rig design and measurement procedure to carry out a wide range of experiments required for identifying parameters for LuGre dynamic friction model. The design choice is based on accuracy of the estimated friction and flexibility in terms of changing contact conditions. The experimental results allow a complete LuGre model, which facilitates, but not limited to, other advanced friction modeling and high performance controller design if needed. In addition, several well-known dynamic friction features (varying break-away force, friction lag and presliding) are successfully demonstrated by our rig, which indicates the adequacy of our approach for capturing highly sophisticated and dynamic friction behavior over a wide range of operating conditions. The proposed set-up and the produced experimental data are believed to greatly facilitate the development of advanced friction compensation and modeling in friction affected mechanisms.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207