MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042014311 · doi:10.1115/1.3023127

Intermittent Predictive Steering Control as an Automobile Driver Model

2008· article· en· W2042014311 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 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntermittencyRange (aeronautics)Model predictive controlControl theory (sociology)Automotive engineeringCurvatureAutomotive industryControl (management)Computer scienceTrajectoryAdvanced driver assistance systemsSimulationEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The originality of this paper is the evaluation of intermittent control as a viable candidate to represent an automobile driver in a path tracking scenario. The control algorithm is based on general predictive control where the road curvature is considered known for a horizon in front of the automobile. The computed steering wheel command is used in an intermittent fashion, the intermittence period being one of the system parameter to study. Simulations are carried out and parameters of the driver, the automobile, and the road are varied. An intermittence period range giving satisfactory performances is observed. A comparison is made with actual car/driver behavior measurements for a lane change maneuver. It is concluded that, according to this driver model, there is a wide range of intermittence period that the automobile driver may be operating. Moreover, it is suggested to consider the intermittency of information as an important parameter for vehicle safety systems.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.178 · 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