MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990776039 · doi:10.1115/1.4027499

Innovative Active Vehicle Safety Using Integrated Stabilizer Pendulum and Direct Yaw Moment Control

2014· article· en· W1990776039 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

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive safetyControl theory (sociology)Moment (physics)YawVehicle dynamicsController (irrigation)EngineeringTorquePendulumControl systemControl engineeringControl (management)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Basically, there are two main techniques to control the vehicle yaw moment. First method is the indirect yaw moment control, which works on the basis of active steering control (ASC). The second one being the direct yaw moment control (DYC), which is based on either the differential braking or the torque vectoring. An innovative idea for the direct yaw moment control is introduced by using an active controller system to supervise the lateral dynamics of vehicle and perform as an active yaw moment control system, denoted as the stabilizer pendulum system (SPS). This idea has further been developed, analyzed, and implemented in a standalone direct yaw moment control system, as well as, in an integrated vehicle dynamic control system with a differential braking yaw moment controller. The effectiveness of SPS has been evaluated by model simulation, which illustrates its superior performance especially on low friction roads.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.180 · 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