MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732974898 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22934

Constraint data‐driven optimal terminal ILC of end product quality for a class of I/O constrained batch processes

2017· article· en· W2732974898 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsIterative learning controlControl theory (sociology)Mathematical optimizationConstraint (computer-aided design)LinearizationFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceLimiterNonlinear systemMathematicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In order to deal with the I/O constraints in a practical plant, a soft limiter is often added into the control design procedure directly; however, the performance of the soft limiter based control approach will be degraded greatly due to the use of the soft constraints. This paper proposes a data‐driven optimal terminal iterative learning control (constraint‐DDOTILC) approach for the end product quality control of batch processes with I/O hard constraints. To deal with nonlinearities, a novel iterative dynamic linearization method without omitting any information of the original plant is introduced such that the derived linearized data‐driven model is completely equivalent to the original nonlinear system. By transferring all the constraints on the system output, control input, and the change rate of input signals into a linear inequality, a novel constraint‐DDOTILC is developed by minimizing an objective function under the derived linear matrix inequality constraint. The optimal learning gain of the constraint‐DDOTILC can be updated iteratively according to the input and output measurements to enhance the flexibility for modifications and expansions of the controlled plant. Both theoretical analysis and simulation results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed constraint‐DDOTILC.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.236 · 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