MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599968214 · doi:10.4271/2010-01-0490

Development of a Powertrain Matching Analysis Tool

2010· article· en· W1599968214 on OpenAlexaff
Melody Baglione, Mark J. Duty

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPowertrainComputer scienceMatching (statistics)Automotive engineeringEngineeringTorqueMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The development of a Powertrain Matching Analysis Tool (PMAT) addresses the challenge of matching the powertrain hardware and control strategy to specific vehicle attributes and driver applications for improved overall vehicle system efficiency. PMAT consists of a reverse tractive road load demand model and a dynamic optimization algorithm developed in MATLAB® and Simulink®. The reverse tractive road load demand model propagates the required wheel torque and speed derived from vehicle speed and road grade through the powertrain system to determine the required fuel flow for various states. The control strategy is treated as a multi-stage, multi-dimension decision process, where dynamic programming is applied to find an optimal control policy that minimizes the accumulated fuel flow over a drive cycle. PMAT is used to assess and develop transmission shift and lock-up control strategies, evaluate powertrain hardware configurations, and establish design criteria. PMAT can also virtually optimize multi-displacement cylinder deactivation system (MDS) operation taking gear and clutch control interaction effects into account. The advantages of the PMAT approach are demonstrated and key system integration concepts are revealed.</div></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)0.001
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 score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207