MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765784008 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.453

H∞ Performance of Mechanical and Power Networks

2017· article· en· W2765784008 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

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl and Stability of Dynamical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Norm (philosophy)Topology (electrical circuits)Network topologyControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceMechanical systemNetwork structureComplex networkMathematicsDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the robustness of two well-known applications of second-order consensus dynamics, namely mechanical and power networks. For uniform subsystem parameters, we derive expressions for the H∞ norms of mechanical and power networks, from external disturbances to body displacements and to generator phase angles, respectively. The closed-form expressions are in terms of the physical parameters (damping coefficients and inertias) of the dynamics and in terms of the spectrum of the grounded Laplacian matrix associated with the network. We then analyze the dependence of the H∞ norm of each network on both the network structure and the physical parameters. For a fixed network topology, we find that each system norm can be minimized by choosing the damping coefficient within a specified range. Theoretical contributions are verified via two illustrative examples for mechanical and power networks, in which we show that the network structure, number of the reference nodes and their location in the network can have considerable effects on the system H∞ norm.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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