Aerodynamic analysis of an active rear split spoiler for improving lateral stability of high-speed vehicles
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines an active rear split spoiler designed for improving lateral stability of high-speed vehicles under high lateral acceleration (high-g) scenarios, such as a tight cornering manoeuvre at high speeds. Downforces produced by the spoiler can enhance the lateral stability of the vehicle under a high-g cornering manoeuvre. On the other hand, the spoiler may introduce additional drags on the vehicle. Aerodynamic analysis and wind tunnel testing are conducted to evaluate the dynamic effects of the active spoiler on a high-speed car. The downforce and drag, as well as their relationship, are investigated using CFD simulations of the car with the active rear split spoiler at different spoiler angles of attack and at different speeds. Then, the achieved CFD simulation results are compared with the experimental data derived from the wind tunnel on the physical car and the spoiler prototype. The observations and findings achieved from the study may provide valuable guidelines for developing active aerodynamic control systems to increase safety of high-speed vehicles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it