MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071536667 · doi:10.1109/iros.2012.6386208

Vehicle-terrain interaction models for analysis and performance evaluation of wheeled rovers

2012· article· en· W2071536667 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahareh Ghotbi, Francisco González, J. Kövecses, Jorge Angeles

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil Mechanics and Vehicle Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTerrainKinematicsComputationComputer scienceMobile robotRobotSimulationSet (abstract data type)Contact forceControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)AlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a multibody dynamics model of a wheeled mobile robot is developed to characterize the terrain reaction forces in terms of the physical and control parameters of the system. A common strategy for simulating the motion of mobile robots on soft soil is to compute the soil reaction forces using terramechanics models and to solve a forward dynamics problem by considering the soil reactions as a set of forces applied to the system. This intends to provide an accurate computation of the forces involved in the wheel-soil interaction; however, a series of factors such as the sensitivity of reaction forces to soil parameters limits the applicability of the existing terramechanics models in unstructured environments. We propose an alternative approach which does not rely on the soil properties, but at the same time does not intend to provide an exact computation of wheel-soil interaction forces. The main objective of this approach is to estimate the effect of changes in control and design parameters on the performance of the system, using the information provided by the dynamics model of the vehicle. To this end, the reaction forces for the wheel-terrain interaction in the ideal limit case of pure rolling and no penetration are obtained upon the specification of the motion at the contact points, via kinematic constraints. The validity of the analysis results obtained using the proposed paradigm is verified by simulation runs and experiments. The experimental results suggest that this approach is successful in predicting the variation of a set of important performance indicators in terms of the changes in the parameters of the system.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil Mechanics and Vehicle DynamicsFrench-language works237,207