MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127244412 · doi:10.1109/lcsys.2020.3046447

LPV Controller Design for Diesel Engine SCR Aftertreatment Systems Based on Quasi-LPV Models

2020· article· en· W3127244412 on OpenAlexafffund
Ji-Hoon Lim, Patrick Kirchen, Ryozo Nagamune

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Control Systems Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)NOxControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceChemistryControl (management)CombustionPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter presents linear parameter-varying (LPV) controller design for the urea-based selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system in diesel engines to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOX) and ammonia (NH3) emissions. Although such LPV SCR controller design has been previously developed, this letter extends it in various ways. The extension includes the usage of NH3slip sensor for feedback LPV control, the adoption of NOX and NH3measurements downstream of the catalyst as gain-scheduling parameters, the simultaneous design of feedforward and feedback LPV controllers, and a robustness analysis of the LPV controllers. Quasi-LPV SCR models derived from an existing control-oriented nonlinear parameter-varying model are utilized in the LPV controller design. The LPV controller performance is demonstrated based on an SCR simulation utilizing experimentally obtained engine-out NOX, and exhaust gas temperatures and flow rates. It is shown that the LPV controller provides satisfactory emission performance, as well as robustness against sensor noise and model parameter uncertainty.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Control Systems LettersSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207