MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2236930178 · doi:10.4271/2006-01-1022

Vehicle Stability through Integrated Active Steering and Differential Braking

2006· article· en· W2236930178 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

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringControl theory (sociology)Differential (mechanical device)Stability (learning theory)Vehicle dynamicsComputer scienceDynamic brakingEngineeringBrakeAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper proposes a vehicle performance/safety method using combined active steering and differential braking to achieve yaw stability and rollover avoidance. The advantages and disadvantages of active steering and differential braking control methods are identified under a variety of input signals, such as J-turn, sinusoidal, and fishhook inputs by using the implemented linear 4 DOF model. Also, the nonlinear model of the vehicle is evaluated and verified through individual and integrated controller. Each controller gives the correction steering angle and correction moment to the simplified steering and braking actuators. The integrated active steering and differential braking control are shown to be most efficient in achieving yaw stability and rollover avoidance, while active steering and differential braking control has been shown to improve the vehicle performance and safety only in yaw stability and rollover avoidance, respectively.</div>

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
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