Prognostics Model to Predict Brake Rotor Thickness Variation
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
Brake rotor thickness variation causes brake torque variation which can lead to brake judder and pulsation, steering wheel oscillations and chassis vibration. In this paper, we have proposed a prognostics methodology to predict the degradation level of brake rotor due to disc thickness variation. Leveraging the time and frequency domain analysis, this model creates health indicators to assess the health of the rotor and predict the rotor thickness variations of 36 micrometers or more. These health indicators that are calculated during braking events include: (i) envelope or variance of the brake master cylinder pressure (MCP); (ii) envelope or variance of the longitudinal acceleration (AX); (iii) the root mean square amplitude of the average order spectrum of the MCP at order one; and (iv) the root mean square amplitude of the average order spectrum of the AX at order one. This paper demonstrates that the above health indicators are significantly larger for a degraded brake rotor due to thickness variation compared to a healthy rotor.
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 | 0.000 | 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