MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119065783 · doi:10.1109/cdc42340.2020.9304180

Distributed Nonlinear Model Predictive Control and Metric Learning for Heterogeneous Vehicle Platooning with Cut-in/Cut-out Maneuvers

2020· article· en· W3119065783 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Hossein Basiri, Benyamin Ghojogh, Nasser L. Azad, Sebastian Fischmeister, Fakhri Karray, Mark Crowley

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlatoonConvergence (economics)Model predictive controlMetric (unit)Computer scienceNetwork topologyControl theory (sociology)Nonlinear systemVehicle dynamicsEngineeringControl (management)Control engineeringAutomotive engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vehicle platooning has been shown to be quite fruitful in the transportation industry to enhance fuel economy, road throughput, and driving comfort. Model Predictive Control (MPC) is widely used in literature for platoon control to achieve certain objectives, such as safely reducing the distance among consecutive vehicles while following the leader vehicle. In this paper, we propose a Distributed Nonlinear MPC (DNMPC), based upon an existing approach, to control a heterogeneous dynamic platoon with unidirectional topologies, handling possible cut-in/cut-out maneuvers. The introduced method addresses a collision-free driving experience while tracking the desired speed profile and maintaining a safe desired gap among the vehicles. The time of convergence in the dynamic platooning is derived based on the time of cut-in and/or cut-out maneuvers. In addition, we analyze the improvement level of driving comfort, fuel economy, and absolute and relative convergence of the method by using distributed metric learning and distributed optimization with Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM). Simulation results on a dynamic platoon with cut-in and cut-out maneuvers and with different unidirectional topologies show the effectiveness of the introduced method.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.150
Teacher spread0.128 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207