Speed Proportional Integrative Derivative Controller: Optimization Functions in Metaheuristic Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advancements in computer science include some optimization models that have been developed and used in real applications. Some metaheuristic search/optimization algorithms have been tested to obtain optimal solutions to speed controller applications in self-driving cars. Some metaheuristic algorithms are based on social behaviour, resulting in several search models, functions, and parameters, and thus algorithm-specific strengths and weaknesses. The present paper proposes a fitness function on the basis of the mathematical description of proportional integrative derivate controllers showing that mean square error is not always the best measure when looking for a solution to the problem. The fitness developed in this paper contains features and equations from the mathematical background of proportional integrative derivative controllers to calculate the best performance of the system. Such results are applied to quantitatively evaluate the performance of twenty-one optimization algorithms. Furthermore, improved versions of the fitness function are considered, in order to investigate which aspects are enhanced by applying the optimization algorithms. Results show that the right fitness function is a key point to get a good performance, regardless of the chosen algorithm. The aim of this paper is to present a novel objective function to carry out optimizations of the gains of a PID controller, using several computational intelligence techniques to perform the optimizations. The result of these optimizations will demonstrate the improved efficiency of the selected control schema.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".