MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-domain physical system modeling and control based on meta-modeling and graph rewriting

2006· article· en· W2538139923 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModeling and Simulation Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBond graphModelicaRotation formalisms in three dimensionsComputer scienceGraph rewritingTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageModeling languageVisual modelingModeling and simulationGraphAlgorithmUnified Modeling LanguageSimulationSoftwareMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A methodology is presented which enables the specification and synthesis of software tools to aid in plant and controller modeling for multi-domain (electrical, mechanical, hydraulic, and thermal) physical systems. The methodology is based on meta-modeling and graph rewriting. The plant is modeled in a domain-specific formalism called the Real World Visual Model (RWVM). Such a model is successively transformed to an Idealized Physical Model (IPM), to an Acausal Bond Graph (ABG), and finally to a Causal Bond Graph (CBG). A Modelica (www.modelica.org) model, consisting of a Causal (algebraic and differential equation) Block Diagram (CBD), is generated from the CBG. All transformations are explicitly modeled using Graph Grammars. A PID controller model, specified in Modelica as a CBD is subsequently integrated with the plant model. AToM <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">3</sup> (atom3.cs.mcgill.ca), A Tool for Multi-formalism and Meta Modeling is used to meta-model and synthesize visual modeling environments for the RWVM, IPM, ABG, and CBG formalisms as well as for transformations between them. The entire process of modeling, transformation, and simulation is demonstrated by means of a hoisting device example. Our methodology drastically reduces development time (of the modeling tool an indirectly of the domain-specific models), integrates model checking via Bond Graph causal analysis, and facilitates management and reuse of meta-knowledge by explicitly modeling formalisms and transformations.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModeling and Simulation SystemsFrench-language works237,207