MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4384824762 · doi:10.32920/23709621

Robust Self-Tuning Control Design under Probabilistic Uncertainty using Polynomial Chaos Expansion-based Markov Models

2023· preprint· en· W4384824762 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yuncheng Du, Hector Budman, Thomas A. Duever

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Polynomial chaosProbabilistic logicController (irrigation)Markov chainDiscretizationMathematicsContinuous stirred-tank reactorMarkov processMathematical optimizationPolynomialApplied mathematicsComputer scienceEngineeringMonte Carlo methodStatisticsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A robust adaptive controller is developed for a chemical process using a generalized Polynomial Chaos (gPC) expansion-based Markov decision model, which can account for time-invariant probabilistic uncertainty and overcome computational challenge for building Markov models. To calculate the transition probability, a gPC model is used to iteratively predict probability density functions (PDFs) of system’s states including controlled and manipulated variables. For controller tuning, these PDFs and controller parameters are discretized to a finite number of discrete states for building a Markov model. The key idea is to predict the transition probability of controlled and manipulated variables over a finite future control horizon, which can be further used to calculate an optimal sequence of control actions. This approach can be used to optimally tune a controller for set point tracking within a finite future control horizon. The proposed method is illustrated by a continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) system with stochastic perturbations in the inlet concentration. The efficiency of the proposed algorithm is quantified in terms of control performance and transient decay.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→