MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380324379 · doi:10.1680/jtran.22.00077

Energy-optimal control of intelligent track inspection trains: design and experiment

2023· article· en· W4380324379 on OpenAlexaff
Xinxin Zhao, Xu Guo, Nasser L. Azad, Jue Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryOptimal controlEnergy consumptionController (irrigation)MATLABTrainModel predictive controlControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceTrack (disk drive)Energy (signal processing)Trajectory optimizationState of chargeSoftwareSimulationControl engineeringBattery (electricity)EngineeringControl (management)Mathematical optimizationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new energy-efficient control strategy for intelligent track inspection trains (ITITs) was developed and its effectiveness evaluated. A sufficiently simple state-space model for a real ITIT is introduced in this paper. This model was used to formulate and solve a constrained optimisation problem to determine the vehicle's optimal speed profile using the pseudo-spectral method to achieve the highest energy savings. A model predictive control (MPC) scheme was then used to create a controller to follow the resulting optimal speed trajectory as closely as possible. The results obtained from co-simulation between a high-fidelity model of the ITIT built within the Amesim software program and the MPC scheme developed in the Matlab/Simulink software environment showed that the optimal speed trajectory was tracked very well when the MPC scheme was applied to the vehicle's high-fidelity model. During the co-simulations, the energy consumption in terms of the battery's state of charge (SOC) changes for the MPC-based optimal speed trajectory following was around 6% less than that for a conventional non-optimal cruise controller. Moreover, in an experiment with a real ITIT, the energy consumption in terms of the SOC changes for the non-optimal cruise controller was 5% more than that for the MPC-based optimal speed trajectory following.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - TransportSame topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207