A Robust Longitudinal Control Strategy of Platoons under Model Uncertainties and Time Delays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated vehicles are designed to free drivers from driving tasks and are expected to improve traffic safety and efficiency when connected via vehicle-to-vehicle communication, that is, connected automated vehicles (CAVs). The time delays and model uncertainties in vehicle control systems pose challenges for automated driving in real world. Ignoring them may render the performance of cooperative driving systems unsatisfactory or even unstable. This paper aims to design a robust and flexible platooning control strategy for CAVs. A centralized control method is presented, where the leader of a CAV platoon collects information from followers, computes the desired accelerations of all controlled vehicles, and broadcasts the desired accelerations to followers. The robust platooning is formulated as a Min-Max Model Predictive Control (MM-MPC) problem, where optimal accelerations are generated to minimize the cost function under the worst case, where the worst case is taken over the possible models. The proposed method is flexible in such a way that it can be applied to both homogeneous platoon and heterogeneous platoon with mixed human-driven and automated controlled vehicles. A third-order linear vehicle model with fixed feedback delay and stochastic actuator lag is used to predict the platoon behavior. Actuator lag is assumed to vary randomly with unknown distributions but a known upper bound. The controller regulates platoon accelerations over a time horizon to minimize a cost function representing driving safety, efficiency, and ride comfort, subject to speed limits, plausible acceleration range, and minimal net spacing. The designed strategy is tested by simulating homogeneous and heterogeneous platoons in a number of typical and extreme scenarios to assess the system stability and performance. The test results demonstrate that the designed control strategy for CAV can ensure the robustness of stability and performance against model uncertainties and feedback delay and outperforms the deterministic MPC based platooning control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".