PARAMETER OPTIMIZATION OF TRACTOR'S STEERING TRAPEZOID MECHANISM BASED ON IMPROVED ADAPTIVE DIRECTION STRATEGY TEACHING-LEARNING-BASED OPTIMIZATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The parameter optimization of the tractor's steering trapezoid mechanism is a traditional optimization problem, and the teaching-learning-based optimization (TLBO) has a better solving ability for parameter optimization of the tractor's steering trapezoid. However, the teacher stage and student stage of TLBO limit the accuracy and stability and the ability to jump out of the local optimization solution. To obtain an optimal solution with an higher accuracy, an improved adaptive direction strategy teaching-learning-based optimization (IADS-TLBO) was used. This improved the feedback stage based on the adaptive direction strategy teaching-learning-based optimization (ADS-TLBO). The IADS-TLBO was verified by three different testing functions, and the results showed that the improved ideas are valid and feasible. Finally, the IADS-TLBO was used to optimize the steering trapezoid mechanism of JOHN DEERE T600. The optimal parameters obtained were as follows: the bottom angle was 35.4º, and the steering arm length was 154 mm. A verification experiment was conducted in the farm tool laboratory of Northeast Agricultural University (China). The experimental results showed that the average bottom angle was 35.48º, and the relative error between the measured and optimized bottom angles was 0.23%, which is less than 5%. This result showed that the results obtained by IADS-TLBO were reliable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".