MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971705329 · doi:10.4271/2013-01-0695

A Comparative Study of Car-Trailer Dynamics Models

2013· article· en· W1971705329 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 International Journal of Passenger Cars - Mechanical Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrailerAeronauticsComputer scienceEngineeringAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The paper examines typical vehicle dynamics models used for the design of car-trailer active safety systems, including active trailer braking and steering. A linear 3 degree-of-freedom (DOF), a nonlinear 4 DOF and a nonlinear 6 DOF car-trailer model are generated. Then, these models are compared with a car-trailer model developed with the commercial software package, CarSim. The benchmark investigation of the car-trailer models is carried out through examining numerical simulation results obtained in two emulated tests, i.e., a single lane-change and a Fishhook maneuver. In the vehicle modeling, a mathematical model of a tire with flexible sidewalls is included to account for transient tire forces. Steady-state aerodynamic forces are included in these models. The deviation of the model dynamic responses, e.g., the variation of the articulation angle between the car and trailer, is discussed. With the benchmark investigation, the car-trailer models in terms of fidelity, complexity, and applicability for active safety system design are addressed.</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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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