MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200336585 · doi:10.1002/mma.7943

Reliability analysis of the uncertain fractional‐order dynamic system with state constraint

2021· article· en· W4200336585 on OpenAlexaff
Ting Jin, Hongxuan Xia, Shangce Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFuzzy Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)MathematicsReliability (semiconductor)Dynamical systems theoryState (computer science)Dynamical system (definition)Mathematical optimizationOrder (exchange)Ordinary differential equationFractional calculusApplied mathematicsControl theory (sociology)Differential equationComputer scienceMathematical analysisAlgorithmControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertain fractional‐order differential equations driven by the Liu process are of significance to depict the heredity and memory features of uncertain dynamical systems. This paper primarily analyses the reliability of the uncertain fractional‐order dynamic system with a state constraint. First, consider the possibility that the real dynamical system is actually limited; the state constraint is absorbed to the ordinary uncertain fractional‐order dynamical system. The concept of reliability of uncertain system is presented innovatively, which are ulteriorly formulated through the existing first‐hitting time theorem. Second, based on the proposed reliability and under a given sufficient condition, a novel uncertain fractional‐order dynamic system with a state constraint is modeled mathematically; corresponding minimum operation ability of the uncertain system is also given. Lastly, the uncertain fractional‐order dynamic system with a state constraint is applied to different physical and financial dynamical models. Analytic expressions of reliability indexes are derived to demonstrate the reasonableness of our model. Meanwhile, expected time response and American barrier option prices are calculated by using the predictor–corrector scheme. The sensitivity analysis is also presented for the numerical examples.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Methods in the Applied SciencesSame topicFuzzy Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207