MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058629327 · doi:10.1504/ijvd.2014.058489

A study of volumetric contact modelling approaches in rigid tyre simulation for planetary rover application

2014· article· en· W2058629327 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

VenueInternational Journal of Vehicle Design · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil Mechanics and Vehicle Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeformation (meteorology)Point (geometry)PlasticityCompactionContact forceEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringMechanicsMaterials scienceGeometryPhysicsMathematicsComposite materialClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For planetary rover applications, a volumetric contact modelling approach is used to capture the dynamics of the rigid tyre/soil interface. The volumetric contact model allows for determining closed-form expressions for the tyre contact forces. These volumetric force representations contain information about the shape of the contact geometry so that the analytical expressions result in fast simulations. Three different volumetric rigid tyre models are developed and evaluated from a plasticity point of view. The performance of each tyre is tested and compared with respect to the resistance force caused by the ongoing compaction of the soil and the resultant plastic deformation. The quantity used to model the plastic deformation of the soil is represented by the soil rebound. Moreover, each tyre model is compared against experimental data to evaluate its validity.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.197 · 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