MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185664833 · doi:10.11591/ijra.v10i3.pp207-223

Increasing the operating depth of an autonomous underwater vehicle using an intelligent magnetic field

2021· article· en· W3185664833 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Jebelli, Arezoo Mahabadi, M.C.E. Yagoub

Bibliographic record

VenueIAES International Journal of Robotics and Automation (IJRA) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderwaterRobotPower (physics)DragElectromagnetic coilComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringSimulationMarine engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Designing and manufacturing a suitable body is one of the most effective factors in increasing the efficiency of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). In fact, increasing the propulsive power of an AUV by reducing the frictional drag on its body and incre asing its maneuverability will positively affect key parts of the AUV’s hardware and software such as control system, sensors, AUV vision, batteries and thrusters. On the other hand, a suitable body should have features such as lightness, underwater vehicl e’s balance, high mechanical strength, and enough space for equipment. Therefore, the design and manufacture of the body requires a lot of analysis in terms of body material, aerodynamic calculations, etc., increases the overall cost. This paper aims to re duce the stress in the body of a Polytetrafluoroethylene ( PTFE ) underwater robot and to increase its operating depth without changing the body’s structure by using fuzzy logic to intelligently controlling the magnetic force generated by the repulsion betwe en the coil and the cylindrical magnet, which saves energy, reduces battery consumption, and increases system performance. The results show that the robot performance depth increases by more than 50% without changing the robot body structure.</p>

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 score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIAES International Journal of Robotics and Automation (IJRA)Same topicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207