Development of an Advanced Torque Vectoring Control System for an Electric Vehicle with In-Wheel Motors using Soft Computing Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A two-passenger, all-wheel-drive urban electric vehicle (AUTO21EV) with four direct-drive in-wheel motors has been designed and developed at the University of Waterloo. A 14-degree-of-freedom model of this vehicle has been used to develop a genetic fuzzy yaw moment controller. The genetic fuzzy yaw moment controller determines the corrective yaw moment that is required to stabilize the vehicle, and applies a virtual yaw moment around the vertical axis of the vehicle. In this work, an advanced torque vectoring controller is developed, the objective of which is to generate the required corrective yaw moment through the torque intervention of the individual in-wheel motors, stabilizing the vehicle during both normal and emergency driving maneuvers. Novel algorithms are developed for the left-to-right torque vectoring control on each axle and for the front-to-rear torque vectoring distribution action. Several maneuvers are simulated to demonstrate the performance and effectiveness of the proposed advanced torque vectoring controller, and the results are compared to those obtained using the ideal genetic fuzzy yaw moment controller. The advanced torque vectoring controller is also implemented in a hardware- and operator-in-the-loop driving simulator to further evaluate its performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".