MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795943996 · doi:10.11159/icsenm18.125

Optimal and Suboptimal Vibration Control of Structures

2018· article· en· W2795943996 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Shamim Miah, Michael Kaliske

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTechnische Universität Dresden
KeywordsVibrationVibration controlOptimal controlComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Control (management)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsAcousticsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structures subjected to extreme dynamic loads such as earthquake, impulse load always creates undesirable vibration. And the unexpected extreme deformation may lead to structural partial damage or fully collapse situation. Hence it is essential to understand the dynamical behaviour of structures subjected to those type of extreme loads. Typically, structures are combined with optimal control algorithms for vibration mitigation. And the desired control force is estimated based on the measured information e.g. displacement, velocity. To do this end, a 6-storied frame is coupled with an optimal control law known as the viscous damping with negative stiffness (VDNS). Additionally, a modified passive control technique is adopted namely the equivalent viscous damping (EVD) and the results are compared with the VDNS control scheme. The performance of the early mentioned strategies are evaluated numerically by employing different type of dynamic loads such as a real earthquake data (e.g. Loma Prieta 1989), a sinusoidal load and an irregular impulse load. A significant reduction of vibration is observed by optimally tuned control law as well as the sub-optimal performance of equivalent passive systems is 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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicVibration Control and Rheological FluidsFrench-language works237,207