MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156067663 · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2021.100220

Conceptual design of controllers for automated modular construction machines

2021· article· en· W3156067663 on OpenAlexaff
Edgar C. Tamayo, Petr Musı́lek, Mohamed Al‐Hussein, Ahmed Jawad Qureshi

Bibliographic record

VenueResults in Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality function deploymentModular designConceptual designControl engineeringComputer scienceDecoupling (probability)SoftwareSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A systematic design approach overcomes the inefficiency associated with the ad hoc development of control strategies, which depends on experience and trial-and-error [1], for automated modular construction machines. Implementation of controllers requires planning at the conceptual design phase. Axiomatic design (AD) has been introduced in developing control solutions. This paper formalizes the conceptual design methodology in building a controller with the use of quality function deployment (QFD) as a design and an analysis tool. The controller design approach using QFD has been applied to the automated steel wall framing machine and to a 2-degree-of-freedom (2 DOF) robotic arm, which can be readily extended to n-DOF robotic manipulators. The analysis and decoupling techniques for controller design presented in this paper differ from those used in traditional AD. QFD for controller design provides continuous transfer functions to represent relationships and mathematical decoupling that is easily implemented in software.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
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
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResults in EngineeringSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207