MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal 2<sup>nd</sup> Order LTI System Identification

2023· article· en· W4385482600 on OpenAlexaff
Leo Stocco

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystem identificationLinearizationComputer scienceOptimal controlImpulse responseMatching (statistics)Process (computing)Control theory (sociology)Approximation algorithmMathematical optimizationSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmController (irrigation)Applied mathematicsMathematicsData modelingControl (management)Artificial intelligenceNonlinear systemPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Just as optimal control addresses the inexact science of selecting controller gains, optimal system identification balances the effects of linearization, estimation and order reduction, to obtain the "best fit" approximation of a target electrical, mechanical, or electro-mechanical system. Like any engineering design problem, it involves matching a set of free design parameters to a requirement specification that defines what "best" means. In this paper, closed-form metrics of a normalized second-order system are used to develop a clear and simple design process to identify a 2ndorder approximation that exhibits the most relevant dynamic characteristics of the target system. The process identifies the optimal parameters of an under or over-damped system from its step-response, and refines the approximation using its impulse-response. The approach is formulaic, non-iterative, and may be used to fit a second-order approximation to a higher-order system response, without the need for a complex search algorithm.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207