MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410384585 · doi:10.1016/j.simpat.2025.103134

Digital twin for magnetic levitation systems: General architecture design and uncertainty analysis

2025· article· en· W4410384585 on OpenAlexafffund
Yang Wang, Sebastian Viancha, Mir Behrad Khamesee

Bibliographic record

VenueSimulation Modelling Practice and Theory · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsLevitationArchitectureMagnetic levitationComputer scienceEngineeringSystems engineeringElectrical engineeringGeographyMagnet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital twins (DTs) are widely used for actuator design, virtual prototyping, simulations, and analysis of model-based system engineering. DT technology is promising for magnetic levitation (maglev) systems, as illustrated by the mover design with high-strength neodymium magnets, the Lorentz force and torque (wrench) model comparison, and motion control verification. Digitalized maglev planar actuators (MLPAs) are time-, material-, labor-, and cost-efficient to develop, and the proposed DT is constructed using an open-source PyBullet module and assisted with a parallel-operated graphic user interface (GUI) using the PyQt5 module. Data transfer between physical systems and DTs is available using socket connections. After comparing the physical and virtual experimental results, the complete DT is verified using a 2-dimensional (2-D) Halbach array and single-disc magnet movers. The uncertainties of the MLPAs are implemented using white noise and system delay models. The ignored uncertainty features are introduced and analyzed for experimental deviations. The proposed DT provides a virtual safeguard environment for the next stage of machine learning research and multiple magnet-mover motion control studies. The first MLPA DT is established with a real-time wrench physics engine, which enables research opportunities for multi-mover motion, robotic collaboration, and artificial intelligence applications. This study is also beneficial for the design and analysis research of MLPAs.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSimulation Modelling Practice and TheorySame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207