MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909663646 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2893267

A New Availability Assessment Method for Complex Control Systems With Multi-Characteristics

2019· article· en· W2909663646 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaojian Yi, Jian Shi, B.S. Dhillon, Huina Mu, Peng Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersKey Laboratory of Solar Activities, Chinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationShanghai Nuclear Engineering Research and Design Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceLimit (mathematics)Monte Carlo methodReliability engineeringComplex systemStability (learning theory)Electric power systemProcess (computing)Control limitsControl systemControl (management)Confidence intervalPower (physics)Mathematical optimizationControl chartMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a new availability assessment method for complex control systems with multi-characteristics based on the goal-oriented (GO) method to evaluate the lower confidence limit of its system availability. First, the GO method for complex control systems with multi-characteristics is illustrated in terms of expounding GO operators and proposing a new exact algorithm with shared signals. Then, the new availability assessment method is expounded in detail, and its process is formulated. Finally, the new method is used to evaluate the lower confidence limit of the system stability of the electrohydraulic control system of a power-shift steering transmission as an example. To verify its advantages and rationality, the availability assessment results and evaluation efficiency are compared with those obtained by the regular Monte Carlo method and the regular exact GO algorithm with shared signals. Furthermore, the coverage rate of the lower confidence limit of the system availability obtained by the new method is compared with the nominal significance level. Overall, this availability assessment method not only improves the theory of the GO method and widens its application but also provides a new approach for the availability assessment of complex control systems that reduces costs and improves the estimation efficiency and accuracy.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207