MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

PHYSICS-AWARE TUNING OF UNSCENTED KALMAN FILTER TO ESTIMATE PARAMETERS, QUANTIFY ABRUPT PARAMETER CHANGE, AND QUANTIFY UNCERTAINTY IN IDENTIFICATION OF A DYNAMIC SYSTEM WITH MANY DOFS

2025· article· en· W4414859281 on OpenAlexaff
Esmaeil Ghorbani, Quentin Dollon, Frédérick P. Gosselin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKalman filterControl theory (sociology)Unscented transformIdentification (biology)Nonlinear systemEstimation theoryExtended Kalman filter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Unscented Kalman Filter (UKF) represents a robust method for estimating latent states and parameters within specified nonlinear equations of dynamic systems under noisy sensor data. Nonetheless, adjusting the filter's hyperparameters (HP)s is essential for effective performance and poses difficulties, especially in systems with many parameters and states to identify, or when it is necessary for the filter to both detect and measure anomaly levels in parameters. Building on the authors previous research on introducing a physics-aware objective function to tune the UKF, this study advances the capabilities of the objective function to tune different adaptive variants of the UKF which facilitates virtual sensing, joint state-parameter estimation, damage quantification and uncertainty quantification under partial observation for systems with many degrees of freedom (DoF) as an open-ended question in structural health monitoring field. To validate the framework, a three DoF damped mass-spring system experiencing a sudden change in physical characteristics is used. Subsequently, the filter's precision in estimating parameters and states is evaluated using a ten DoF system with 40 states and unknown parameters, featuring sparsely placed sensors. Furthermore, the Lorenz attractor under partial observation is used as another case study to highlight why and how the physics-aware objective outperforms other commonly used data-driven objective functions. These results demonstrate the potential of the proposed framework for addressing challenging identification problems in dynamical systems such as tracking sudden changes and evaluating the uncertainties linked to both modeling and measurement, particularly those with limited and noisy sensor data.

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)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
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 topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→