Application of a Seat Transmissibility Approach to Experience Measured or Predicted Seat-Rail Vibration in a Multi-Attribute Simulator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer modelling, virtual prototyping and simulation is widely used in the automotive industry to optimize the development process. While the use of CAE is widespread, on its own it lacks the ability to provide observable acoustics or tactile vibrations for decision makers to assess, and hence optimize the customer experience. Subjective assessment using Driver-in-Loop simulators to experience data has been shown to improve the quality of vehicles and reduce development time and uncertainty. Efficient development processes require a seamless interface from detailed CAE simulation to subjective evaluations suitable for high level decision makers. In the context of perceived vehicle vibration, the need for a bridge between complex CAE data and realistic subjective evaluation of tactile response is most compelling. A suite of VI-grade noise and vibration simulators have been developed to meet this challenge. In the process of developing these solutions VI-grade has identified the need for a means of accurately interpreting and presenting CAE vibration predictions at hardpoints such as the seat-rail (which can be efficiently and accurately modelled) as equivalent vibration at the driver tactile interfaces. This need has resulted in the development of a seat transmissibility approach to transform the seat-rail vibration to an accurate reproduction of vibration at the seat to driver interface points. This paper will describe an efficient measurement based seat transmissibility approach, and identify additional benefits such as the ability to make virtual seat swaps or experience the vibration that would be perceived by people with different physical characteristics (body mass, height, etc.).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".