MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782828279 · doi:10.4271/2017-36-0434

Data Synchronization for Offline and Online Identification of Dynamic Systems

2017· article· en· W2782828279 on OpenAlexaff
Leonam Pecly, Marcelo L. O. Souza, Keyvan Hashtrudi-Zaad

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSynchronization (alternating current)Identification (biology)Data synchronizationOnline and offlineComputer networkOperating systemWireless sensor network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

System dynamics identification has an important role in engineering, whether it is for used for modeling dynamic objects or mechanisms, controller design, or simulation of dynamic systems. The accuracy of estimation certainly depends on how the input variables used for estimation are obtained and synchronized in time. For systems such as actuators where usually only position is measured, the velocity and acceleration input variables are obtained in discrete-time domain through difference equations that shift the signals in time. In this way, the incorrect data synchronization in time might become an issue; likewise in online identification where filters used might cause significant phase delay. In this paper, the effect of discrete data synchronization for offline and online identification of dynamic systems is studied. The identification process is performed utilizing the widely-known batch Least Squares (LS) method and Recursive LS for off-line and on-line identification processes. Four possible combinations of backward difference and forward difference techniques are utilized for computing velocity and acceleration. Simulations of linear-time-invariant mass-damper-spring system for ten sets of system parameters are used to identify the best way to synchronize the data within the four possible differentiation options. The performance of the four options are evaluated in terms of parameter convergence and force prediction in the root mean square error sense. The results are discussed and guidelines are presented.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207