MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7108067789 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2024-0173

Intention recognition-based braking strength control of an automotive magnetorheological fluid-based braking system

2025· article· en· W7108067789 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Dynamics and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFlywheelThreshold brakingBraking systemEngine brakingBrakeBraking distanceAutomotive industryElectronic brakeforce distribution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Braking intention recognition plays a pivotal role in advancing braking assistant systems and enhancing driving safety, and is expected to be an essential component in intelligent automotive brake-by-wire systems. This paper proposes an intention recognition-based braking strength control algorithm that utilizes fuzzy logic to construct a robust control model. In addition, the braking intention parameters are selected according to the classification of braking status. The credibility of the proposed control algorithm is validated through comprehensive simulations, followed by its integration into the flywheel type 1/4 automotive magnetorheological fluid-based braking system test bench, equipped with a brake pedal simulator. Subsequently, braking control experiments are conducted within the established experimental system. Simulation results demonstrate that the braking strength control model realizes effective braking control and braking experiments indicate the accuracy of the braking intention recognition method. Importantly, the vehicle velocity variations under the proposed braking strength control model aligns with the expectation.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicVehicle Dynamics and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207