MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414939372 · doi:10.1002/cjce.70044

Fuzzy logic‐enhanced sliding mode control of Belousov–Zhabotinsky reaction dynamics

2025· article· en· W4414939372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Negin Ramezani Pargami, Sohrab Ali Ghorbanian, Hooman Fatoorehchi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicChaos control and synchronization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Fuzzy logicSliding mode controlConvergence (economics)ChaoticTracking errorFuzzy control system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study introduces two novel strategies for regulating the chaotic dynamics of the Belousov–Zhabotinsky (BZ) reaction: a smoothed sliding mode controller (SMC‐Proposed), designed to reduce chattering while preserving robustness, and an adaptive fuzzy sliding mode controller (SMC‐Fuzzy), applied to the BZ system for the first time. These approaches are compared against a classical sign‐based sliding mode controller (SMC‐sign) in terms of tracking accuracy, convergence speed, and chattering suppression. Simulation results show that while SMC‐sign achieves the lowest tracking error (RMSE = 0.00001), it produces severe chattering (973.4 Hz). In contrast, the SMC‐Fuzzy controller reduces chattering to 79.2 Hz, with good accuracy (RMSE = 0.00107) and faster stabilization. The SMC‐Proposed model offers a balanced trade‐off, achieving moderate accuracy while significantly reducing high‐frequency energy without relying on fuzzy logic. Frequency‐domain analysis using power spectral density (PSD) confirms the chattering suppression capability of both proposed methods. These findings highlight the practical advantages of the SMC‐Fuzzy and smoothed SMC controllers for robust and efficient control of chaotic chemical 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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicChaos control and synchronizationFrench-language works237,207