MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312952041 · doi:10.23952/jnva.6.2022.2.08

Dynamic optimization with a non-smooth LPV system in aero-engine transition state acceleration process

2022· article· en· W4312952041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiao Teng, Konghui Guo, Lei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nonlinear and Variational Analysis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChongqing Normal University
KeywordsAccelerationProcess (computing)State (computer science)Transition (genetics)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringControl engineeringEngineeringPhysicsAlgorithmClassical mechanicsChemistryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the dynamic optimization of the acceleration process in the engine transition state. It is difficult for general linear and nonlinear models to portray the complex mechanical characteristics of an aero-engine. We consider a non-smooth linear parameter variation (LPV) system with nonlinear terms as a mathematical model for this acceleration process. First, a control parameterization method is used to transform the problem into a parameter selection problem. Then, a smoothing technique is used to deal with the non-smooth state constraints. Finally, in order to obtain the global optimal solution of this dynamic optimization problem, an optimization algorithm based on a combination of a gradient descent method and a modified particle swarm optimization is designed to solve the equivalent nonlinear programming problem. The effectiveness and superiority of the proposed algorithm is computationally verified by using the LPV model identified from the actual data.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nonlinear and Variational AnalysisSame topicRocket and propulsion systems researchFrench-language works237,207