MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102858448 · doi:10.1109/tie.2008.918392

Modeling, Analysis, and Neural Network Control of an EV Electrical Differential

2008· article· en· W2102858448 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraction control systemControl theory (sociology)TorqueElectric vehicleArtificial neural networkElectronic differentialTraction motorVehicle dynamicsTraction (geology)Control systemEngineeringAutomotive engineeringInduction motorDirect torque controlSlip (aerodynamics)Computer scienceVoltageControl (management)Steering wheelPower (physics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents system modeling, analysis, and simulation of an electric vehicle (EV) with two independent rear wheel drives. The traction control system is designed to guarantee the EV dynamics and stability when there are no differential gears. Using two in-wheel electric motors makes it possible to have torque and speed control in each wheel. This control level improves EV stability and safety. The proposed traction control system uses the vehicle speed, which is different from wheel speed characterized by a slip in the driving mode, as an input. In this case, a generalized neural network algorithm is proposed to estimate the vehicle speed. The analysis and simulations lead to the conclusion that the proposed system is feasible. Simulation results on a test vehicle propelled by two 37-kW induction motors showed that the proposed control approach operates satisfactorily.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.196 · 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