MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088706060 · doi:10.1017/s0890060420000384

Evolutionary layout design synthesis of an autonomous greenhouse using product-related dependencies

2020· article· en· W3088706060 on OpenAlexaff
Yann-Seing Law-Kam Cio, Yuanchao Ma, Aurélian Vadean, Giovanni Beltrame, Sofiane Achiche

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial intelligence for engineering design analysis and manufacturing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouseGenetic algorithmQuality (philosophy)MechatronicsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Product (mathematics)Component (thermodynamics)Problem statementProduction (economics)Engineering design processProduct designIndustrial engineeringProcess engineeringManufacturing engineeringEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The development of autonomous greenhouses has caught the interest of many researchers and industrial considering their potential of offering an optimal environment for the growth of high-quality crops with minimum resources. Since an autonomous greenhouse is a mechatronic system, the consideration of its subsystem (e.g. heating systems) and component (e.g. actuators and sensors) interactions early in the design phase can ease the product development process. Indeed, this consideration could shorten the design process, reduce the number of redesign loops, and improve the performance of the overall mechatronic system. In the case of a greenhouse, it would lead to a higher quality of the crops and a better management of resources. In this work, the layout design of a general autonomous greenhouse is translated into an optimization problem statement while considering product-related dependencies. Then, a genetic algorithm is used to carry out the optimization of the layout design. The methodology is applied to the design of a fully autonomous greenhouse (45 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm) for the growth of plants in space. Although some objectives are conflictual, the developed algorithm proposes a compromise to obtain a near-optimal feasible layout design. The algorithm was also able to optimize the volume of components (occupied space) while considering the energy consumption and the overall mass. Their respective summed values are 2844.32 cm 3 , which represents 7% of the total volume, 5.86 W, and 655.8 g.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial intelligence for engineering design analysis and manufacturingSame topicGreenhouse Technology and Climate ControlFrench-language works237,207