MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727568095 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2005-0024

A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DOUBLE- AND SINGLE-GIMBALED CONTROL MOMENT GYROSCOPES FOR VIBRATION SUPPRESSION

2005· article· en· W2727568095 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Aaron Muise, Robert Bauer

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGimbalControl moment gyroscopeGyroscopeControl theory (sociology)VibrationMoment (physics)Attitude controlSpacecraftEngineeringVibration controlComputer sciencePhysicsControl (management)Aerospace engineeringAcousticsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Control Moment Gyroscopes (CMGs) have typically been used for attitude control of satellites. This paper extends the application of CMGs to regulate vibrations in the flexible appendages of orbiting spacecraft using a novel double- and single-gimbaled CMG prototype design. System Identification and control experiments were carried out to compare the effectiveness of this new CMG to regulate lightly damped, low frequency vibrations in a single flexible rib. Experimental results conclude that the CMG can be effectively used to regulate vibrations in flexible structures and, for equivalent values of gyricity and disturbance, the double-gimbaled CMG performance can be two to three times more effective and independent of the direction of applied disturbance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation DynamicsFrench-language works237,207