MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414955752 · doi:10.1109/tcsii.2025.3619257

Finite-Iteration Learning Tracking Control of Magnetic Shape Memory Alloy Actuator Based on Neural Network

2025· article· en· W4414955752 on OpenAlexaff
Yewei Yu, Linlin Nie, Xiuyu Zhang, Chun‐Yi Su, Miaolei Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits & Systems II Express Briefs · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Systems and Laser Technology
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIterative learning controlControl theory (sociology)Artificial neural networkTracking (education)ActuatorTracking errorCorrectnessConvergence (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hysteresis is the key factor affecting the positioning accuracy of the magnetic shape memory alloy-based actuator (M-BA). In this paper, we investigate the finite-iteration tracking control problem of M-BA using neural network technology. Firstly, a neural network-based iterative learning control strategy is developed for finite-iteration tracking of a discrete non-affine system, where the contraction mapping principle is employed to establish the relation between tracking error and the iteration bound, thereby determining the settling iteration. Then, incorporating the mathematical induction and the data-driven methods, a sufficient condition for system convergence is provided. Finally, experiments are conducted to validate the effectiveness of the proposed method and the correctness of the theory. This study contributes to improving the positioning accuracy of the M-BA, providing insights into its potential applications in electromagnetic drive and precision electromechanical 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 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits & Systems II Express BriefsSame topicOptical Systems and Laser TechnologyFrench-language works237,207