MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126538029 · doi:10.1109/tits.2011.2176121

Intelligent Traction Control Model for Speed Sensor Vehicles in Computer-Based Transit System

2011· article· en· W2126538029 on OpenAlexaff
Kourosh Noori, Kouroush Jenab

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraction control systemTraction (geology)Computer scienceIntelligent transportation systemControl engineeringSlip (aerodynamics)EngineeringSimulationReal-time computingAutomotive engineeringTransport engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a real-time intelligent traction control model for speed sensor vehicles in computer-based transit systems is proposed. Using the Bayesian decision theory, the model analyzes speed sensor data to learn and classify the train traction conditions (i.e., spin/slip, normal, and slide) that are required for studying vehicle motion patterns. The patterns are applied on the sensor input in real-time format to classify train traction and reduce the error/risk of classification that may cause service interruptions and incidents. The model can enable us to manage a number of state natures (i.e., spin/slip, normal, and slide), features (i.e., delta speed and train speed), and prior knowledge traction conditions. This model engine can be implemented in any programming language in onboard or embedded computers. As a result, the impact of noisy sensors (inaccurate data) and its delays in such a hard real-time control system is mitigated. This conceptual model is applied to a case study with promising results for target and simulation 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.

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)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207