MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400526109 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2024.3421285

Similarities Between Wheels and Tracks: A “Tire Model” for Tracked Vehicles

2024· article· en· W4400526109 on OpenAlexaff
Ruizeng Zhang, Wei Zhou, Haiou Liu, Jianwei Gong, Huiyan Chen, Amir Khajepour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringVehicle safetyVehicle dynamicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an important component of land transportation systems, tracked vehicles (TRVs) and wheeled vehicles (WVs) have developed independently in parallel, particularly in the modeling of vehicle-ground interactions. However, their differences are not as significant as they appear. This paper introduces a simplified terramechanics-based track-ground interaction model for the motion control of TRVs on firm ground. The simplified interaction model addresses the problem that the terramechanics-based models are too complex to be applied to optimization-based real-time control algorithms. Interestingly, the proposed track-ground interaction model closely resembles to the tire model used for WVs. Through comparison, we present the unified mechanisms underlying vehicle-ground interactions. In our approach, TRVs can be treated as a special type of skid-steer WV, which benefits the theories and methods of wheel vehicles to be deployed in the TRV domain. Finally, we verify the proposed interaction model with extensive dynamic data from a real dual motor-driven TRV to demonstrate its effectiveness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicVehicle Dynamics and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207