ADAPTIVE BACKSTEPPING CONTROL OF A PIEZO-POSITIONING MECHANISM WITH HYSTERESIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Piezo-positioning mechanisms are often used in high-precision positioning applications. Due to their materials, nonlinear hysteretic behavior is commonly observed in such mechanisms and can be described by a LuGre model. In this paper, we develop two robust adaptive backstepping control algorithms for piezo-positioning mechanisms. In the first scheme, we take the structure of the LuGre model into account in the controller design, if the parameters of the model are known. A nonlinear observer is designed to estimate the hysteresis force. In the second scheme, there is no apriori information required from these parameters and thus they can be allowed totally uncertain. In this case, the LuGre model is divided into two parts. While the unknown parameters of one part are incorporated with unknown system parameters for estimation, the effect of the other part is treated as a bounded disturbance. An update law is used to estimate the bound involving this partial hysteresis effect and the external load. For both schemes, it is shown that not only global stability is guaranteed by the proposed controller, but also both transient and asymptotic performances are quantified as explicit functions of the design parameters so that designers can tune the design parameters in an explicit way to obtain the required closed loop behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".