MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2730982674 · doi:10.1109/tmech.2017.2721159

A Model Compensation-Prediction Scheme for Control of Micromanipulation Systems With a Single Feedback Loop

2017· article· en· W2730982674 on OpenAlexafffund
Weize Zhang, Juntian Qu, Xuping Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Settling timeCompensation (psychology)Overshoot (microwave communication)Computer scienceTransformation (genetics)Observer (physics)LTI system theoryController (irrigation)Feedback loopNoise (video)Control engineeringStep responseEngineeringLinear systemControl (management)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many micromanipulation systems employ sensorless actuators and possess unknown modeling errors, feedback measurement noises, and time delays. Conventional model-based control schemes ignore some of these uncertainties, and thus sacrifice the control system performance. This paper presents a new model compensation-prediction scheme for micromanipulation systems that can be described by two-dimensional state-space models, estimate the unknown modeling errors from noisy single feedback measurement, and predict and compensate the system time delay. This approach combines two modeling errors into a single equivalent modeling error through mathematical transformation, and estimates the combined term using a noise-insensitive extended high-gain observer. After removing the unknown term, the system is then transformed into a time-invariant form, and a Smith predictor is implemented to predict and compensate the time delay. The effectiveness of the proposed compensation-prediction scheme is demonstrated by both numerical simulations and experiments on two typical micromanipulation systems, namely a robotic biosample stimulator and a material characterization microgripper. The results show that this method can significantly improve the control performance of a conventional proportional-integral-derivative controller, by simultaneously reducing the settling time and overshoot of the micromanipulation systems.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ASME Transactions on MechatronicsSame topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207