MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767965473 · doi:10.1504/ijvsmt.2017.10008917

An optimal robust controller for active trailer differential braking systems of car-trailer combinations

2017· article· en· W2767965473 on OpenAlexaff
Tushita Sikder, Yuping He, Eungkil Lee, Saurabh Kapoor

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngine and Fuel Emissions
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrailerAutomotive engineeringEngineeringDifferential (mechanical device)Braking systemControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Control engineeringComputer scienceAerospace engineeringBrakeControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an optimal robust controller for active trailer differential braking (ATDB) systems of car-trailer (CT) combinations. To design ATDB systems, controllers based on the linear quadratic regulator (LQR) technique have been explored. In these LQR controller designs, vehicle forward speed, trailer payload, etc., were assumed as constants. In reality, a CT combination is frequently confronted with variations of operating conditions and vehicle parameters, which may impose significant impacts on the lateral stability of these vehicles. This motivates the investigation into robust controller designs. An ATDB controller is designed using the µ synthesis technique. A new method using a genetic algorithm (GA) for tuning the weighting function parameters for the robust controller is presented. In the parameters tuning process, the lateral stability is emphasised and the path-following capability is considered. Simulation results confirm the validity of the ATDB controller.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and TestingSame topicEngine and Fuel EmissionsFrench-language works237,207