Bayesian Inference on Individual-Based Models by Controlling the Random Inputs

Author(s):  
Michael Spence ◽  
Paul Blackwell
Author(s):  
Subhashis Ghosal ◽  
Aad van der Vaart

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 52-58
Author(s):  
Sergey M. AFONIN ◽  

An electroelastic actuator for nanomechatronics is used in nanotechnology, adaptive optics, microsurgery, microelectronics, and biomedicine to actuate or control mechanisms, systems based on the electroelastic effect, and to convert electrical signals into mechanical displacements and forces. In nanomechatronic systems, a piezoactuator is used in scanning microscopy, laser systems, in astronomy for precision alignment, for compensation of temperature, gravitational deformations and atmospheric turbulence, focusing, and stabilizing the image. In this study, a condition for absolute stability of an electroelastic actuator control system for nanomechatronics under deterministic and random inputs is obtained. A number of equilibrium positions in an electroelastic actuator mechatronic control system are found, the totality of which is represented by a straight line segment. The electroelastic actuator’s deformation control system dead band relative width is determined for the actuator’s symmetric and asymmetric hysteresis characteristics. Under deterministic inputs and with fulfilling the condition for the derivative of the nonlinear hysteresis actuator deformation characteristic, the set of equilibrium positions of the electroelastic actuator control system for nanomechatronics is absolutely stable. Under random inputs, the system absolute stability with respect to the mathematical expectations of the electroelastic actuator mechatronic control system equilibrium positions has been determined subject to fulfilling the condition on the derivative of the actuator hysteresis characteristic.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qing Dou ◽  
Ashish Vaswani ◽  
Kevin Knight ◽  
Chris Dyer

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olmo Van den Akker ◽  
Linda Dominguez Alvarez ◽  
Marjan Bakker ◽  
Jelte M. Wicherts ◽  
Marcel A. L. M. van Assen

We studied how academics assess the results of a set of four experiments that all test a given theory. We found that participants’ belief in the theory increases with the number of significant results, and that direct replications were considered to be more important than conceptual replications. We found no difference between authors and reviewers in their propensity to submit or recommend to publish sets of results, but we did find that authors are generally more likely to desire an additional experiment. In a preregistered secondary analysis of individual participant data, we examined the heuristics academics use to assess the results of four experiments. Only 6 out of 312 (1.9%) participants we analyzed used the normative method of Bayesian inference, whereas the majority of participants used vote counting approaches that tend to undervalue the evidence for the underlying theory if two or more results are statistically significant.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document