MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510202726 · doi:10.4271/2005-01-2316

Sensitivity of Steering Wheel Nibble to Suspension Parameters, Tire Dynamics, and Brake Judder

2005· article· en· W1510202726 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsContinental (Canada)
FundersMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Automotive engineeringBrakeVehicle dynamicsSuspension (topology)Computer scienceEngineeringElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper presents a unified framework for addressing NVH related issues attributed to tire uniformity and Brake rotor DTV. While the focus is on the perceptible manifestation of such vibration (nibble), the presentation goes to the root-cause of nibble and how various suspension/tire/brake components contribute to the generation/amplification of such vibration. While the tire/brake excitation mechanisms have different origins, they cause the same (nibble) symptom to the driver. Results are presented for three types of vehicle suspensions, along with procedures that were developed specifically for this study and some of the understanding that was gained.. Also presented is an efficient data reduction scheme that makes it easy to visualize 3D motions of suspension components and investigate their dynamics. Amongst the “take-aways” from this study are 1) an understanding of how tire/brake excitation causes nibble, 2) an overview of the various parameters influencing nibble sensitivity, and 3) How this information can be used to alter the NVH attributes of a given vehicle.</div>

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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