MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418489673 · doi:10.13111/2066-8201.2016.8.2.6

A Neural Network Controller New Methodology for the ATR-42 Morphing Wing Actuation

2016· article· en· W2418489673 on OpenAlexafffund
MOSBAH Abdallah Ben, DAO Thien My, GUEZGUEZ Mohamed Sadok, ZAAG Mahdi

Bibliographic record

VenueINCAS BULLETIN · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMorphingController (irrigation)Control theory (sociology)ActuatorWind tunnelAirfoilPID controllerPosition (finance)Artificial neural networkWingEngineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringStructural engineeringAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Temperature control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A morphing wing model is used to improve aircraft performance.To obtain the desired airfoils, electrical actuators are used, which are installed inside of the wing to morph its upper surface in order to obtain its desired shape.In order to achieve this objective, a robust position controller is needed.In this research, a design and test validation of a controller based on neural networks is presented.This controller was composed by a position controller and a current controller to manage the current consumed by the electrical actuators to obtain its desired displacement.The model was tested and validated using simulation and experimental tests.The results obtained with the proposed controller were compared to the results given by the PID controller.Wind tunnel tests were conducted in the Price-Païdoussis Wind Tunnel at the LARCASE laboratory in order to calculate the pressure coefficient distribution on an ATR-42 morphing wing model for different flow conditions.The pressure coefficients obtained experimentally were compared with their numerical values given by XFoil software.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINCAS BULLETINSame topicAeroelasticity and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207