A driver-adaptive stability control strategy for sport utility vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional vehicle stability control (VSC) systems are designed for average drivers. For a driver with a good driving skill, the VSC systems may be redundant; for a driver with a poor driving skill, the VSC intervention may be inadequate. To increase safety of sport utility vehicles (SUVs), this paper proposes a novel driver-adaptive VSC (DAVSC) strategy based on scaling the target yaw rate commanded by the driver. The DAVSC system is adaptive to drivers’ driving skills. More control effort would be exerted for drivers with poor driving skills, and vice versa. A sliding mode control (SMC)-based differential braking (DB) controller is designed using a three degrees of freedom (DOF) yaw-plane model. An eight DOF nonlinear yaw-roll model is used to simulate the SUV dynamics. Two driver models, namely longitudinal and lateral, are used to ‘drive’ the virtual SUV. By integrating the virtual SUV, the DB controller, and the driver models, the performance of the DAVSC system is investigated. The simulations demonstrate the effectiveness of the DAVSC strategy.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".