MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202139043 · doi:10.3390/en14196251

Model Predictive Control of Internal Combustion Engines: A Review and Future Directions

2021· review· en· W3202139043 on OpenAlexafffund
Armin Norouzi, Hamed Heidarifar, Mahdi Shahbakhti, Charles Robert Koch, Hoseinali Borhan

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsModel predictive controlActuatorField (mathematics)Internal combustion engineCombustionControl engineeringNonlinear systemEngineeringAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An internal combustion engine (ICE) is a highly nonlinear dynamic and complex engineering system whose operation is constrained by operational limits, including emissions, noise, peak in-cylinder pressure, combustion stability, and actuator constraints. To optimize today’s ICEs, seven to ten control actuators and 10–20 feedback sensors are often used, depending on the engine applications and target emission regulations. This requires extensive engine experimentation to calibrate the engine control module (ECM), which is both cumbersome and costly. Despite these efforts, optimal operation, particularly during engine transients and to meet real driving emission (RDE) targets for broad engine speed and load conditions, has still not been obtained. Methods of model predictive control (MPC) have shown promising results for real-time multi-objective optimal control of constrained multi-variable nonlinear systems, including ICEs. This paper reviews the application of MPC for ICEs and analyzes the recent developments in MPC that can be utilized in ECMs. ICE control and calibration can be enhanced by taking advantage of the recent developments in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in applying Machine Learning (ML) to large-scale engine data. Recent developments in the field of ML-MPC are investigated, and promising methods for ICE control applications are identified in this paper.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations81
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207