MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280609745 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2205.06231

The Experimental Multi-Arm Pendulum on a Cart: A Benchmark System for Chaos, Learning, and Control

2022· preprint· en· W4280609745 on OpenAlexaff
Kadierdan Kaheman, Urban Fasel, Jason J. Bramburger, Benjamin Strom, J. Nathan Kutz, Steven L. Brunton

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPendulumBenchmark (surveying)Double pendulumComputer scienceInverted pendulumControl theory (sociology)Dynamical systems theoryNonlinear systemChaoticControl engineeringSimulationControl (management)EngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The single, double, and triple pendulum has served as an illustrative experimental benchmark system for scientists to study dynamical behavior for more than four centuries. The pendulum system exhibits a wide range of interesting behaviors, from simple harmonic motion in the single pendulum to chaotic dynamics in multi-arm pendulums. Under forcing, even the single pendulum may exhibit chaos, providing a simple example of a damped-driven system. All multi-armed pendulums are characterized by the existence of index-one saddle points, which mediate the transport of trajectories in the system, providing a simple mechanical analog of various complex transport phenomena, from biolocomotion to transport within the solar system. Further, pendulum systems have long been used to design and test both linear and nonlinear control strategies, with the addition of more arms making the problem more challenging. In this work, we provide extensive designs for the construction and operation of a high-performance, multi-link pendulum on a cart system. Although many experimental setups have been built to study the behavior of pendulum systems, such an extensive documentation on the design, construction, and operation is missing from the literature. The resulting experimental system is highly flexible, enabling a wide range of benchmark problems in dynamical systems modeling, system identification and learning, and control. To promote reproducible research, we have made our entire system open-source, including 3D CAD drawings, basic tutorial code, and data. Moreover, we discuss the possibility of extending our system capability to be operated remotely to enable researchers all around the world to use it, thus increasing access.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicExperimental and Theoretical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207