MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147735528 · doi:10.1080/00423114.2021.1909736

The importance of equation<i>η</i>=<i>μn</i><sup>2</sup>in dimensional analysis and scaled vehicle experiments in vehicle dynamics

2021· article· en· W3147735528 on OpenAlexaff
Sina Milani, Hormoz Marzbani, Nasser L. Azad, William Melek, Reza N. Jazar

Bibliographic record

VenueVehicle System Dynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryDimensionless quantityCrashVehicle dynamicsSimple (philosophy)EngineeringComputer scienceSimulationAutomotive engineeringAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dimensional analysis has been very helpful in experimentation of very large or small-scale engineering systems. A good example would be experimentation on the aircrafts and ships, which was made cost-effective and simple by dimensional analysis. The history of dimensional analysis mentioned in the introduction section of the present document includes many of such applications. Automotive industry, however, never felt the need as the price or the size of land vehicles did not make experimentation so far-fetched; therefore, there are many crash tests which every new vehicle has to go through before mass production This changed with the imminent introduction of autonomous vehicles, which brought all the risks involved in experimenting with them. Many cost-effective experimental platforms are introduced, such as QCar https://www.quanser.com/products/qcar/ or laboratories, such as Scaled Autonomous Vehicles Indoor (SAVI) https://cast.tamu.edu/research/technology-demonstrator-platforms/scaled-autonomous-vehicles-indoor-tdp/. The present study will enable the results taken from such platforms to be translated to real-sized vehicles, enabling researchers to study dynamics of various vehicles. Classical vehicle equations of motion including constant velocity, accelerating bicycle model and roll model have been made dimensionless. The case of steady-state responses is also calculated in a dimensionless form. Some practical numerical examples are also mentioned as a proof of theory.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVehicle System DynamicsSame topicVehicle Dynamics and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207