MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402245056 · doi:10.47852/bonviewaaes42023106

Analysis of the Effects of Wheel Spacers on the Roll Stability of the Vehicle

2024· article· en· W4402245056 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

VenueArchives of Advanced Engineering Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStability (learning theory)Automotive engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to identify the impact of tire spacers on the vehicle's overall stability and subsequently the influence of various kinematic factors due to the induced vehicle's roll moment. The placement of the spacers was studied as a function of the arrangement of the spacers and was compared to a model without spacers. The outcome of this project would be to highlight the importance of spacers to reduce the roll within a vehicle and to provide an idea for the customer about what orientation will provide the best results from the spacers that they have installed. Using the CarSim software, we were able to develop different accurate models within the scope of this study. A series of these models were then simulated using simulation software on a variety of real-life conditions in order to predict the behavior of the vehicle under different conditions. These results were used to evaluate the handling characteristics of the vehicle and determine the ideal placement of spacers attached to the wheels in order to improve the vehicle's handling characteristics. Received: 14 April 2024 | Revised: 31 July 2024 | Accepted: 20 August 2024 Conflicts of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to this work. Data Availability Statement Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Author Contribution Statament Glenn Xavier Vaz: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualization; Zeinab El-Sayegh: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Resources, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.175 · 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