MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410242051 · doi:10.18280/mmep.120425

Design and Simulation of Adaptive Sliding Mode Fuzzy Controller for a 2-Link Robot Manipulator

2025· article· en· W4410242051 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aya M. Hameed, Ahmed Khalaf Hamoudi

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLink (geometry)Robot manipulatorControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceFuzzy logicManipulator (device)Controller (irrigation)Control engineeringMode (computer interface)RobotEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Computer networkHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sliding mode controllers (SMC) are among the most durable and nonlinear regulators.Its methodical design process gives a simple answer for the control signal.The main disadvantage is that a traditional SMC suffers from chatter, which creates an unwanted zigzag stir over the sliding face.numerous approaches were developed and applied to palliate the downsides of this traditional methodology.The purpose of this paper is to reduce the settling time and magnitude of chatter as small as possible by designing several regulators; a classical sliding mode controller (CSMC) with a saturation function (SF), a CSMC with a barrier function (BF), an adaptive sliding mode controller (ASMC) with a saturation function, a conventional sliding mode fuzzy controller (CSMFC) with a saturation function and an adaptive sliding mode fuzzy controller (ASMFC) with a saturation function.The issues of the simulations can be attained using MATLAB 2018a/Simulink.The modeling shows that the results of ASMFC and CSMFC are better than the results of ASMC with achromatism function, and CSMC with achromatism function and with barricade function because the magnitude of chatter in the control action has been important reduced to roughly zero value and they take small settling time in comparison with others.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207