MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135198710 · doi:10.15837/ijccc.2021.1.4076

Data-Driven Model-Free Sliding Mode and Fuzzy Control with Experimental Validation

2020· article· en· W3135198710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computers Communications & Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSliding mode controlControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceVariable structure controlMode (computer interface)Fuzzy logicComponent (thermodynamics)Control (management)Fuzzy control systemControl systemControl engineeringNonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents the combination of the model-free control technique with two popular nonlinear control techniques, sliding mode control and fuzzy control. Two data-driven model-free sliding mode control structures and one data-driven model-free fuzzy control structure are given. The data-driven model-free sliding mode control structures are built upon a model-free intelligent Proportional-Integral (iPI) control system structure, where an augmented control signal is inserted in the iPI control law to deal with the error dynamics in terms of sliding mode control. The data-driven model-free fuzzy control structure is developed by fuzzifying the PI component of the continuous-time iPI control law. The design approaches of the data-driven model-free control algorithms are offered. The data-driven model-free control algorithms are validated as controllers by real-time experiments conducted on 3D crane system laboratory equipment.

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.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.240 · 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