MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405725597 · doi:10.1049/itr2.12604

Implications of as‐built highway horizontal curves on vehicle dynamics/kinematics characteristics under adaptive cruise control

2024· article· en· W4405725597 on OpenAlexaff
Shuyi Wang, Yuanwen Lai, Xuntao Qiu, Yang Ma, Said M. Easa, Yubing Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Intelligent Transport Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarSimCruise controlKinematicsCurvatureConsistency (knowledge bases)AdaptabilityVehicle dynamicsSimulationEngineeringComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringControl (management)GeometryMathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to road curvature and sensors’ limited field of view, as‐built highway curves would pose an operational challenge to the adaptive cruise control (ACC) system and its shared control. However, very few studies explored the adaptability of ACC system‐dedicated vehicles (V‐ACC) considering the vehicle‐road geometry interaction. Therefore, the objectives of this study are twofold: (i) investigating the implications of horizontal curves on V‐ACC dynamics and kinematics characteristics; and (ii) evaluating V‐ACC's adaptability from the safety, comfort, and speed consistency (S‐C‐S) aspects. To this end, a PreScan/CarSim/MATLAB/Simulink co‐simulation platform is established and it is validated by OpenACC database followed by designing many tests featuring circular curve radius ( R C ), desired speed ( V de ), and clearance. The impact mechanism of geometric features was analysed by interpreting dynamics and kinematics characteristics along curves and critical features were further extracted by reference to S‐C‐S thresholds. The results show that: (i) either smaller R C or higher V de causes those characteristics toward their S‐C‐S margins; (ii) neither sideslip nor rollover occurs, and speed consistency is good in most R C conditions; and (iii) drivers can follow the leading car comfortably with V de = 40, 80–100 km/h but feel uncomfortable when V de = 50–70 km/h and R C approaches its lower bounds.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Intelligent Transport SystemsSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207