MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283386136 · doi:10.1002/mma.8492

A review on design and implementation of type‐2 fuzzy controllers

2022· review· en· W4283386136 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

VenueMathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFuzzy Logic and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicVariety (cybernetics)Fuzzy control systemContext (archaeology)Controller (irrigation)Computer scienceControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, advances in different fields of technology have increased demands for reliable controllers. Uncertainty and disturbances, which are inevitable in most real‐world systems, as well as increasing complexity in the dynamics of many systems, are requiring the design and application of intelligent controllers. Fuzzy controllers, and specifically type‐2 fuzzy control techniques, could play a beneficial role in a variety of control purposes, since they are robust against uncertainties. Therefore, an immense body of research is devoted to these fuzzy control techniques. This paper introduces a comprehensive review about the most recent advances in the design and implementation of type‐2 fuzzy control schemes both for integer‐ and fractional‐order systems. Thus, in addition to the past and present achievements in this context, future trends are also delineated. Moreover, most important works dealing with type‐2 fuzzy controller are discussed, and their advantages and drawbacks are outlined. Consequently, we firmly believe the present paper will pave the way for future research in this area.

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)0.020
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.250 · 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