MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015198214 · doi:10.1109/tits.2020.2983171

Integrated Stability Control for Narrow Tilting Vehicles: An Envelope Approach

2020· article· en· W3015198214 on OpenAlexafffund
Chen Tang, Amir Khajepour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Research Foundation
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlEngineeringCarSimController (irrigation)Envelope (radar)Electronic stability controlStability (learning theory)Control engineeringVehicle dynamicsControl (management)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an integrated stability control strategy for tilting vehicles. The work extends the envelope-based lateral stability controller by introducing and enforcing the roll envelope in the optimal control design. The model predictive controller (MPC) scheme is adopted to apply the control effort only when the predicted vehicle states are leaving the safe envelopes. The non-minimum phase problem in active tilting control is handled by utilizing the predictive feature of the controller. It is shown via the simulation in CarSim that, by adopting the envelope-based control scheme, the control effort to maintain the roll stability of narrow vehicles can be greatly reduced. The integrated controller also improves the vehicle handling performance while still guarantees its lateral and roll stability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicVehicle Dynamics and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207