MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529083606 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.09.011

Fault-Tolerant Control of a Boeing 747-100/200 Based on a Laguerre Function-Based MPC Scheme

2016· article· en· W2529083606 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Yu, Youmin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)ActuatorControl theory (sociology)Fault toleranceElevatorModel predictive controlFault (geology)Scheme (mathematics)Controller (irrigation)Control reconfigurationComputer scienceEngineeringFlight control surfacesFault detection and isolationControl engineeringControl (management)Reliability engineeringEmbedded systemAerospace engineeringAerodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault-tolerant control (FTC) is of paramount for the safety of aircraft in the presence of any faults due to its safety-critical property. An active FTC scheme is presented and implemented for the nonlinear benchmark model of Boeing 747-100/200 to safely land aircraft even in the presence of major actuator faults/failures. Furthermore, for the improvement of its on-line fault-tolerant capability, Laguerre functions based MPC (LF-MPC) scheme is further developed and applied to the fault-tolerant controller design. The benefits of LF-MPC scheme are 1) redistributing the control efforts efficiently to the remaining functional actuators in case of faults, 2) increasing the on-line fault-tolerant capability by reducing optimized parameters. In addition, time delay of fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) information is also considered and integrated into the feedback control loop. The effectiveness is demonstrated on the well-known Boeing 747-100/200 benchmark through a landing phase with elevators stuck in the process of landing.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207