Optimization of Gain Scheduled Controller for an Active Trailer Steering System Using an Evolutionary Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Car–trailer combinations can experience unstable motion modes such as trailer-sway, jackknifing and rollover that can lead to fatal accidents. These unstable motions can be mitigated with the use of an active trailer steering (ATS) system. Prior studies in ATS have leveraged the linear quadratic regulator (LQR) as an ATS controller but for many of these designs it was assumed that the vehicle and operating parameters were constant. In reality, vehicle and operating parameters may vary and have an impact on the stability of a car–trailer combination. In this paper, the weighting matrices of the LQR controller are determined using the GDE3 evolutionary optimization algorithm with the objective of addressing the design trade off between minimizing the car–trailer’s path-following performance for low vehicle speeds and minimizing the rearward amplification for high vehicle speeds. The effectiveness of the approach is demonstrated using a numerical simulation car–trailer model developed in the CarSim simulator. Our results show that the multi-objective tuned gain scheduling controller outperforms a non-tuned gain scheduling controller in terms of improving the lateral stability and the path following performance of car–trailer combinations in driver in the loop single lane-change maneuvers at a constant vehicle forward speed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".