Path and Control Planning for Autonomous Vehicles in Restricted Space and Low Speed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents models of path and control planning for the parking, docking, and movement of autonomous vehicles at low speeds, considering space constraints. Given the low speed of motion, and in order to test and approve the proposed algorithms, vehicle kinematic models are used. Recent works on the development of parking algorithms for autonomous vehicles are reviewed. Bicycle kinematic models for vehicle motion are considered for three basic types of vehicles: passenger car, long wheelbase truck, and articulated vehicles with and without steered semitrailer axes. Mathematical descriptions of systems of differential equations in matrix form and expressions for determining the linearization elements of nonlinear motion equations that increase the speed of finding the optimal solution are presented. Options are proposed for describing the interaction of vehicle overall dimensions with the space boundaries, within which a maneuver should be performed. An original algorithm that considers numerous constraints is developed for determining vehicle permissible positions within the closed boundaries of the parking area, which are directly used in the iterative process of searching for the optimal plan solution using nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC). The process of using NMPC to find the best trajectories and control laws while moving in a semi-limited space of constant curvature (turnabouts, roundabouts) are described. Simulation tests were used to validate the proposed models for both constrained and unconstrained conditions and the output (state-space) and control parameters’ dependencies are shown. The proposed models represent an initial effort to model the movement of autonomous vehicles for parking and have the potential for other highway applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".