MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366984027 · doi:10.1002/rnc.6738

Observer‐based memory‐event‐triggered controller design for quarter‐vehicle suspension systems subject to deception attacks

2023· article· en· W4366984027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiang Sun, Zhou Gu, Xiufeng Mu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsObserver (physics)Control theory (sociology)DeceptionController (irrigation)Quarter (Canadian coin)Computer scienceSuspension (topology)Event (particle physics)State observerControl (management)Artificial intelligencePsychologyMathematicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper concerns the problem of an observer‐based memory‐event‐triggered controller for quarter‐vehicle suspension systems (SSs) under deception attacks. The observer‐based controller is utilized to solve the difficulty that full state information of quarter‐vehicle SSs cannot be obtained. A memory‐event‐triggered mechanism (METM) considering both network load and observer performance is proposed, where the historical information of the measured output is utilized in the event‐triggered condition and the observer, reducing mal‐triggering events caused by abrupt disturbance and enhancing the sensitivity to deception attacks. Sufficient conditions that guarantees an performance of quarter‐vehicle SSs are presented. Finally, a simulation example under the bump road conditions is provided to validate the effectiveness of the derived controller.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Robust and Nonlinear ControlSame topicVehicle Dynamics and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207