Handling Delays in Yaw Rate Control of Electric Vehicles Using Model Predictive Control With Experimental Verification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a new approach is proposed to deal with the delay in vehicle stability control using model predictive control (MPC). The vehicle considered here is a rear-wheel drive electric (RWD) vehicle. The yaw rate response of the vehicle is modified by means of torque vectoring so that it tracks the desired yaw rate. Presence of delays in a control loop can severely degrade controller performance and even cause instability. The common approaches for handling delays are often complex in design and tuning or require an increase in the dimensions of the controller. The proposed method is easy to implement and does not entail complex design or tuning process. Moreover, it does not increase the complexity of the controller; therefore, the amount of online computation is not appreciably affected. The effectiveness of the proposed method is verified by means of carsim/simulink simulations as well as experiments with a rear-wheel drive electric sport utility vehicle (SUV). The simulation results indicate that the proposed method can significantly reduce the adverse effect of the delays in the control loop. Experimental tests with the same vehicle also point to the effectiveness of this technique. Although this method is applied to a vehicle stability control, it is not specific to a certain class of problems and can be easily applied to a wide range of model predictive control problems with known delays.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".