Improving Stability of a Narrow Track Personal Vehicle using an Active Tilting System
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">A compact sized vehicle that has a narrow track could solve problems caused by vehicle congestion and limited parking spaces in a mega city. Having a smaller footprint reduces the vehicle's total weight which would decrease overall vehicle power consumption. Also a smaller and narrower vehicle could travel easily through tight and congested roads that would speed up the traffic flow and hence decrease the overall traffic volume in urban areas. As an additional benefit of having a narrow track length, a driver can experience similar motorcycle riding experience without worrying about bad weather conditions since a driver sits in a weather protected cabin. However, reducing the vehicle's track causes instability in vehicle dynamics, which leads to higher possibility of rollovers if the vehicle is not controlled properly.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">A three wheel personal vehicle with an active tilting system is designed in MapleSim. The vehicle is driven by constant rotational input which is applied to the rear wheel. Simulation results indicate that for the case when the tilting vehicle is moving at 45 km/h and the front wheel's steering angle is 4°, the resulting turning circle's diameter without rollovers is found to be 9.5 m less than the non-tilting vehicle moving at the same condition as the tilting vehicle.</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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it