Obstacle Avoidance Model of Two‐Wheeled Vehicles for Nonrigid Obstacles Based on Social Forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To describe the microtrajectory change behavior of two‐wheeled vehicles when encountering nonrigid obstacles, this paper proposes an obstacle avoidance model of two‐wheeled vehicles for nonrigid obstacles based on the improved social force method. In the model, the obstacle avoidance characteristics of two‐wheeled vehicles for nonrigid obstacles and the safety operation requirements of two‐wheeled vehicles are considered. The calculation methods of the minimum boundary distance of avoidance and the boundary avoidance force range edge function are proposed based on the ultimate turning angle and boundary avoidance characteristics, respectively. The speed control and direction control behavior of the rider to the vehicle is abstracted as the form of social force, and the two‐wheeled vehicle/rider individual is subjected to the avoidance force and correction force perpendicular to the direction of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle body. The centrifugal trajectory obstacle avoidance motion obeying the Newtonian mechanics is studied based on the characteristics of the vehicle body turning angle change. Different traffic environments are constructed by MATLAB software and simulated according to the model running logic, and sensitivity analysis is performed based on the actual data collected in the survey. The simulation results show that, under the same conditions, compared with μi = 50N, when μi = 200N, the X‐axis displacement of the simulated vehicle in the avoidance process is shortened by 26.31%, and the body deflection angle increases by 50.75% at the end moment of the avoidance process. Compared with electric motorcycles, the displacement of the X‐axis in the avoidance process of the electric bicycle is shortened by 16.92%, and the body deflection angle at the end moment of the avoidance process is increased by 13.68%. The simulation results show that the model can well describe the trajectory change behavior characteristics of two‐wheeled vehicles/riders encountering nonrigid obstacles in real situations, and the obstacle avoidance model of two‐wheeled vehicles proposed in this paper is considered to be traffic justified.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".