MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1597729540 · doi:10.4271/2009-01-2179

Vehicle-to-Vehicle NVH Performance Variance

2009· article· en· W1597729540 on OpenAlexaff
Robert M. Shaver, Kuang-Jen J. Liu, Michael G. Hardy

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Noise and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoise, vibration, and harshnessAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceVariance (accounting)EngineeringAcousticsVibrationBusinessPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">The effect of vehicle-to-vehicle variance on a comprehensive set of NVH performance measures is investigated. A complete experimental assessment of full vehicle NVH performance is often limited to a single vehicle due to test complexity, vehicle availability, and/or program timing constraints. However vehicle-to-vehicle performance variation is inherently present due to factors such as manufacturing variability, nonlinear response of component systems, and component mode coupling with vehicle structure. In past studies, NVH variability was investigated utilizing sample sizes up to one hundred vehicles but on a limited set of localized NVH input/response characteristics [<span class="xref">1</span>]. In this paper, the statistical sample size is reduced to five vehicles in order to study vehicle-to-vehicle variance on a more comprehensive set of NVH performance measures: structural modal and operational response. Modal response is evaluated at both the global vehicle and component levels. The variance in operational performance is evaluated both in vibration and acoustic response under road and powertrain inputs. The details of these test methodologies and results are presented. A discussion of recommended sample sizes for each test methodology is provided.</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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicVehicle Noise and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207