MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949641964 · doi:10.1049/iet-est.2019.0008

Soft‐computing techniques for cruise controller tuning for an off‐road electric vehicle

2019· article· en· W2949641964 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Electrical Systems in Transportation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCruise controlAutomotive engineeringControl theory (sociology)Electronic speed controlOvershoot (microwave communication)Controller (irrigation)PID controllerAccelerationPowertrainEngineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringTorqueControl (management)Temperature control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speed controllers may be employed to provide safer along with more secure vehicles. They may also be used to minimise environmental pollution, e.g. speed controllers can be employed to track speed optimal velocity profile based on energy consumption minimisation. Consequently, accurate speed tracking is important. However, despite soft‐computing techniques have been proved successful in controller tuning, there is a limited amount of research on these techniques applied to speed controller optimisation. Therefore, this study performs a comparison study on PI cruise controller tuning for an off‐road electric vehicle. A cost function is designed to reach an accurate EV speed tracking while considering safety aspects, such as no reverse speed. The ACO‐NM algorithm has been demonstrated to be the most efficient compared to GA, ALO, DE, and PSO. Indeed, ACO‐NM reached high‐quality solutions for lower computational cost for three driving cycles. Moreover, contrary to the majority of published work on the subject, experimental validations have been carried out with the optimised PI cruise controllers. The experimental results have validated the ACO‐NM efficiency with a maximum overshoot average <10% for the hardest acceleration of the real driving cycle.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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