MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200572327 · doi:10.32393/csme.2021.215

Design Optimization Of Autonomous Steering Control Schemes For Articulated Vehicles

2021· article· en· W3200572327 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Canadian Mechanical Engineering. Volume 4 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceControl engineeringControl (management)Control theory (sociology)Automotive engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a design synthesis approach for the development of autonomous steering control schemes for articulated vehicles. To design the autonomous steering controller, a 3 degrees of freedom (DOF) yaw-plane model is generated to represent a car-trailer combination, and a model predictive control (MPC) algorithm is used for lateral position and yaw motion control of the articulated vehicle. For enhancing the performance of the self-steering articulated vehicle, the design synthesis of the autonomous driving control schemes is formulated as a design optimization problem. Two optimization algorithms, namely Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) and Differential Evolution (DE), are introduced and tested for the design optimization. In the design synthesis, the design variables may include passive vehicle design variables, e.g., geometric. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed design synthesis approach, selected simulation results are presented and analyzed. The insightful findings attained from the study may be used as guidelines for developing autonomous driving control systems of articulated vehicles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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