MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data-driven reference trajectory optimization for precision motion systems

2024· article· en· W4390628613 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Balula, Dominic Liao‐McPherson, Alisa Rupenyan, John Lygeros

Bibliographic record

VenueControl Engineering Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNCCR CatalysisInnosuisse - Schweizerische Agentur für InnovationsförderungSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceAccelerationPosition (finance)Control theory (sociology)Tracking (education)Tree traversalMotion (physics)Trajectory optimizationMotion controlFidelityCompensation (psychology)Controller (irrigation)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmRobotControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a data-driven optimization-based pre-compensation method to improve the contour tracking performance of precision motion stages by modifying the reference trajectory and without modifying any built-in low-level controllers. The position of the precision motion stage is predicted with data-driven models, a linear low-fidelity model is used to optimize traversal time, by changing the path velocity and acceleration profiles then a non-linear high-fidelity model is used to refine the previously found time-optimal solution. We experimentally demonstrate that the proposed method is capable of simultaneously improving the productivity and accuracy of a high precision motion stage. Given the data-based nature of the models, the proposed method can easily be adapted to a wide family of precision motion systems.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueControl Engineering PracticeSame topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207