MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802097754 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2009-0054

FURTHER RESULTS ON THE ZEROS OF A SLEWING RIGID-FLEXIBLE BEAM

2009· article· en· W2802097754 on OpenAlexaffvenue
M. Vakil, Reza Fotouhi, P.N. Nikiforuk

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Laplace transformPole–zero plotMathematicsRobustness (evolution)Beam (structure)Transfer functionPlanarMathematical analysisEngineeringComputer scienceStructural engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is much research on the poles of the transfer function (between the beam-end displacement and base torque) of slewing single-flexible beams. However, there is no comprehensive report on their zeros. The study on the zeros is of great importance, especially from the controller design perspective, because some of these zeros are in the right-hand-side (RHS) of the domain S in the Laplace transform. These RHS zeros limit the control bandwidth; deteriorate the trade-off between the robustness and the desirable control performance. They also create challenges in the beam-end trajectory-tracking. It is for these reasons that a comprehensive study on the zeros is of valuable significance which for the first time is reported in this paper. It is shown here that the physical parameters of the slewing flexible beam fall into three categories with respect to the locations of the zeros. In the first category, an increase (or decrease) in values of physical parameters move the zeros further from (or closer to) the imaginary axis. The second category is composed of physical parameters where an increase (or decrease) in their values move the zeros closer to (or further from) the imaginary axis. The third category includes the physical parameters where the locations of the zeros are independent of their values.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207