MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2568018768 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2016.7798599

Sensor location in a controlled thermal fluid

2016· article· en· W2568018768 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStability and Controllability of Differential Equations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Linear-quadratic-Gaussian controlObserver (physics)Boundary (topology)Boundary value problemTruncation (statistics)MathematicsCovarianceDistributed parameter systemComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisOptimal controlMathematical optimizationPartial differential equationControl (management)PhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate different criteria for locating sensors for the state estimation in a controlled thermal fluid modeled by the Boussinesq equations. This paper focuses on the linearized Boussinesq equation. We combine optimal sensor location with observer design to obtain a sensor placement. One way to locate sensors is to minimize the covariance of the estimation error. Another way is based on the geometric structure of the feedback functional gain. The controllers are finite dimensional and act on a portion of the boundary through Neumann/Robin boundary conditions. Dirichlet boundary conditions are imposed on the rest of the boundary. A lower order observer is constructed by using the LQG balanced truncation for the linearized controlled system. Computer simulations are presented to compare the effectiveness of different sensor locations.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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