MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202567610 · doi:10.3390/act10100257

A Comparative Study of Four Parametric Hysteresis Models for Magnetorheological Dampers

2021· article· en· W3202567610 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

VenueActuators · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersDonghua UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Shanghai
KeywordsHysteresisDamperParametric statisticsViscoelasticityMagnetorheological damperCreepMagnetorheological fluidNonlinear systemParametric modelStructural engineeringSystem identificationControl theory (sociology)EngineeringMaterials scienceComputer scienceMathematicsPhysicsData modelingControl (management)Composite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamics of the magnetorheological damper is complex, including the inherent hysteresis characteristics and nonlinear creep behavior in the low-velocity region. Mathematical models for these complex dynamics are very important to the function of the damper. In this paper, a comparative study of the four parametric dynamic models, which are the hysteresis bi–viscous model, viscoelastic-plastic model, Bouc–Wen model, and improved Bouc–Wen model, is performed. The study includes the building of a common test apparatus and the parameter identification for the four models. The comparison of the four models concludes that (1) all four models are comparative and that (2) the improved Bouc–Wen model has the highest accuracy.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.204 · 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