{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03358613217768147, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0065005417118093175, 'mean_word_length': 5.328767123287672, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An experimental comparison of proportional-integral, sliding mode, and robust adaptive control for piezo-actuated nanopositioning stages.

This paper presents a comparative study of the proportional-integral (PI) control, sliding mode control (SMC), and robust adaptive control (RAC) for applications to piezo-actuated nanopositioning stages without the inverse hysteresis construction. For a fair comparison, the control parameters of the SMC and RAC are selected on the basis of the well-tuned parameters of the PI controller under same desired trajectories and sampling frequencies. The comparative results show that the RAC improves the tracking performance by 17 and 37 times than the PI controller in terms of the maximum tracking error e(m) and the root mean tracking error e(rms), respectively, while the RAC improves the tracking performance by 7 and 9 times than the SMC in terms of e(m) and e(rms), respectively.