MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212048475 · doi:10.1115/1.4053026

Robust Nonlinear Model Predictive Control With Model Predictive Sliding Mode for Continuous-Time Systems

2021· article· en· W3212048475 on OpenAlexaff
Elyse Hill, S. Andrew Gadsden, Mohammad Biglarbegian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlRobustness (evolution)Nonlinear systemBenchmark (surveying)Sliding mode controlContext (archaeology)Controller (irrigation)Mean squared errorComputer scienceMathematicsControl (management)StatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a robust, tube-based nonlinear model predictive controller for continuous-time systems with additive disturbances which cascades two sampled-data model predictive controllers: the first creates a desired path using nominal dynamics, and the second maintains the true state close to the nominal state by regulating a sliding variable designed on the error between the true and nominal states. The sampled-data model predictive approach permits easy incorporation of continuous-time sliding mode dynamics, allowing a dynamic boundary layer and tube design to be included. In this way, the control applied to the system capitalizes on the robustness properties of traditional sliding mode control (SMC) while incorporating system constraints. Stability analysis is presented in the context of input-to-state stability (ISS) for continuous-time systems. The proposed controller is implemented on two case studies, is compared to benchmark tube-based model predictive controllers, and is evaluated using average root-mean-square (RMS) values on the state and input variables, in addition to average integral square error (ISE) and integral absolute error (IAE) values on the position states. Results reveal that the proposed technique responds to higher levels of disturbance with significant increases in control effort, eliminates constraint violation by using of constrained SMC as the secondary controller, and maintains similar tracking performance to benchmark controllers at lower levels of control effort.

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)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207