pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07342 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Recognition: unknown

Dual-Envelope Constrained Nonlinear MPC for Distributed Drive Electric Vehicles Drifting Under Bounded Steering and Direct Yaw-Moment Control

Yurun Gan , Ziyu Song , Jing Yang , Zheng Lin , Jianuo Zhang , Tongtong Gu , Haitao Ding , Nan Xu
show 3 more authors
Por Lip Yee Wei Ni Jun Luo
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords vehicle drifting controlnonlinear model predictive controldual envelope constraintssaddle point modeldistributed drive electric vehiclesyaw moment controlphase plane analysissideslip angle tracking
0
0 comments X

The pith

Dual envelopes tied to input-dependent saddle points let NMPC keep distributed-drive vehicles drifting under bounded steering and yaw-moment limits.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that conventional fixed stability envelopes break down for closed-loop drifting because control inputs move the saddle point and reshape the phase plane. It builds a saddle-point coordinate model from a nonlinear tire model and handling diagram that incorporates road adhesion, velocity, steering angle, and yaw moment. From this, it defines an outer envelope as the recoverable set under bounded inputs and an inner envelope as the non-drifting region of unsaturated tire forces. These envelopes are imposed as constraints inside a nonlinear model predictive controller. Hardware-in-the-loop tests confirm the constrained controller produces smoother approach to the drift equilibrium and lower tracking errors than an unconstrained NMPC, especially when friction is mismatched.

Core claim

By locating saddle points that shift with front-wheel steering angle and additional yaw moment, an extended dual-envelope framework is constructed in the slip-angle yaw-rate plane; the outer envelope marks the recoverable drifting region under input bounds while the inner envelope marks the non-drifting stability region, and these envelopes are embedded as constraints in an NMPC law.

What carries the argument

The extended dual-envelope framework in the slip-angle yaw-rate phase plane, where the outer envelope defines the recoverable set under bounded steering and yaw-moment inputs and the inner envelope bounds the non-drifting unsaturated-tire region.

If this is right

  • The controller produces smoother convergence to the drift saddle point than NMPC without envelope constraints.
  • Steady-state tracking errors in vehicle speed, sideslip angle, and yaw rate drop by 33.07 percent, 71.18 percent, and 31.27 percent respectively.
  • Peak tracking error falls by 63.66 percent when road friction differs from the model value.
  • The method respects explicit bounds on steering angle and direct yaw-moment inputs while maintaining the drifting regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same saddle-point envelope construction could be applied to other input-affine nonlinear systems whose equilibria move with actuator limits.
  • Real-time friction estimation would be a natural extension to keep the envelopes accurate during sudden surface changes.
  • The inner-envelope boundary might also serve as a switching surface for hybrid controllers that decide when to enter or exit the drifting regime.

Load-bearing premise

State trajectories converge toward the saddle point when front-wheel steering angle and additional yaw moment remain within their bounds.

What would settle it

If closed-loop trajectories diverge from the drift saddle point or cross the outer envelope under the dual-envelope NMPC when road friction is lower than modeled, the recoverable-set guarantee does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.07342 by Haitao Ding, Jianuo Zhang, Jing Yang, Jun Luo, Nan Xu, Por Lip Yee, Tongtong Gu, Wei Ni, Yurun Gan, Zheng Lin, Ziyu Song.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The proposed system architecture. This paper analyzes the factors affecting the saddle-point position and derives its governing equations under different input [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Single track model with reference path. region. The parameter λd is a direction factor; µx and µy are the longitudinal and lateral friction coefficients, respectively; and Fz denotes the vertical load acting on the tire. The tire sideslip angles of the front and rear tires are expressed as follows: αf = β + lf r/Vx − δ; αr = β − lr r/Vx. (4) To validate the UniTire-Ctrl tire model, Pirelli 205/45 R18 tires… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Validation of UniTire-Ctrl model. (a) The Pure longitudinal slip conditions. (b) The pure cornering conditions. (c) The combined slip conditions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) The lateral sideslip characteristic curves of the front and rear wheels. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Saddle point positions at different front wheel steering angles. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Handling diagram under ∆Mz = 1000Nm. (a) The lateral sideslip characteristic curves. (b) Handling diagram [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Saddle point position variation for different additional yaw moments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The degree of convergence from point c to the saddle point a under ˙ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The state derivatives of saddle point and its surrounding points. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Considering the drift extended dual envelope under the influence of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The drifting extended dual envelope with the change of different factors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Comparison of state quantity changes in the drift process. (a) Vehicle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Constraint effects under controllers with and without the envelope. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Comparison of state quantity changes in the drift process when [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Constraint effects under controllers with and without the envelope when [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_19.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Distributed drive electric vehicles offer superior yaw moment control for autonomous drifting in extreme maneuvers. Conventional drift analysis constructs stability boundaries from open loop equilibria points and assumes a fixed envelope structure. However, coupling among control inputs reshapes the phase plane and shifts saddle point location, which can invalidate open loop envelopes when used for closed loop drifting. To address this issue, a saddle point coordinate model is established in this paper by combining a nonlinear tire model with the handling diagram and explicitly accounting for road adhesion coefficient, longitudinal velocity, front wheel steering angle, and additional yaw moment. Based on saddle point properties, an extended dual envelope framework is constructed in the phase plane of slip angle and yaw rate. Using the convergence tendency of state points toward saddle points under bounded control inputs, the outer envelope defines a recoverable set under constraints on front wheel steering angle and additional yaw moment. The inner envelope characterizes the non-drifting stability region associated with unsaturated tire forces. Finally, a nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) controller is developed using the extended dual envelope constraint. Hardware-in-the-loop experiments show that, compared with NMPC without envelope constraints, the proposed method enables smoother convergence toward the drift saddle point, reduces the steady-state tracking errors of vehicle speed, sideslip angle, and yaw rate by 33.07%, 71.18%, and 31.27%, respectively, and decreases the peak tracking error by 63.66% under road-friction mismatch.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a dual-envelope constrained nonlinear MPC for distributed-drive electric vehicles to perform controlled drifting under bounded front-wheel steering and direct yaw-moment inputs. It derives a saddle-point coordinate model by combining a nonlinear tire model with the handling diagram, explicitly including road adhesion coefficient, longitudinal velocity, steering angle, and yaw moment. An extended dual-envelope framework is constructed in the (sideslip angle, yaw rate) phase plane, where the outer envelope is defined as a recoverable set based on the asserted convergence tendency of states toward the saddle point under the input bounds, and the inner envelope represents the non-drifting stability region with unsaturated tire forces. An NMPC controller incorporates these envelope constraints, and hardware-in-the-loop experiments report smoother convergence and specific reductions in steady-state tracking errors (33.07% for vehicle speed, 71.18% for sideslip angle, 31.27% for yaw rate) plus 63.66% lower peak error compared to unconstrained NMPC under road-friction mismatch.

Significance. If the key convergence property holds uniformly, the dual-envelope approach could offer a practical way to certify recoverable drifting regions for EVs with independent torque control, addressing input coupling that invalidates open-loop envelopes. The concrete HIL error reductions under friction mismatch provide evidence of improved tracking robustness, extending standard tire and handling-diagram methods with explicit bounded-input considerations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and dual-envelope construction] Abstract and dual-envelope construction: The claim that 'using the convergence tendency of state points toward saddle points under bounded control inputs, the outer envelope defines a recoverable set' is load-bearing for the NMPC safety guarantee. No phase-plane analysis, Lyapunov argument, or closed-loop simulation of the vector field under the stated bounds on steering angle and yaw moment is referenced to establish this tendency across admissible (velocity, adhesion, initial-condition) regimes. If the tendency fails when the saddle point migrates or yaw-moment saturation differs from assumption, the outer-envelope constraint no longer ensures recovery.
  2. [HIL experiments section] HIL experiments section: The reported percentage improvements (33.07%, 71.18%, 31.27%, 63.66%) are specific, but the results lack details on the number of trials, statistical measures, or sensitivity analysis showing that gains persist when the convergence assumption is stressed (e.g., at velocity/friction boundaries where the saddle point may exit the bounded-input reachable set). This weakens the empirical support for the central modeling claims.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract introduces the 'extended dual envelope framework' without a forward reference to the exact figure or equations defining the inner/outer boundaries; adding this would improve clarity for readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help clarify the presentation of the dual-envelope framework and strengthen the experimental validation. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions planned for the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and dual-envelope construction] The claim that 'using the convergence tendency of state points toward saddle points under bounded control inputs, the outer envelope defines a recoverable set' is load-bearing for the NMPC safety guarantee. No phase-plane analysis, Lyapunov argument, or closed-loop simulation of the vector field under the stated bounds on steering angle and yaw moment is referenced to establish this tendency across admissible (velocity, adhesion, initial-condition) regimes. If the tendency fails when the saddle point migrates or yaw-moment saturation differs from assumption, the outer-envelope constraint no longer ensures recovery.

    Authors: The convergence tendency follows directly from the saddle-point coordinate model, which combines the nonlinear tire model with the handling diagram while explicitly incorporating bounded steering angle and yaw moment. This formulation shows that state trajectories are attracted to the saddle point within the input bounds for the considered operating regimes. To make this explicit and address the concern, we will add phase-plane vector-field plots and closed-loop simulations under varying longitudinal velocity, adhesion coefficient, and initial conditions in the revised manuscript. These additions will confirm the tendency holds across admissible regimes and reinforce the recoverable-set interpretation of the outer envelope. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [HIL experiments section] The reported percentage improvements (33.07%, 71.18%, 31.27%, 63.66%) are specific, but the results lack details on the number of trials, statistical measures, or sensitivity analysis showing that gains persist when the convergence assumption is stressed (e.g., at velocity/friction boundaries where the saddle point may exit the bounded-input reachable set). This weakens the empirical support for the central modeling claims.

    Authors: The reported error reductions were obtained from hardware-in-the-loop tests under road-friction mismatch, with the proposed controller demonstrating smoother convergence and lower tracking errors than the unconstrained baseline. We agree that additional statistical detail and boundary sensitivity analysis would strengthen the evidence. In the revision we will specify the number of trials performed, report standard deviations or other statistical measures, and include sensitivity results at velocity and friction boundaries to verify that performance gains persist when the saddle point approaches the edge of the bounded-input reachable set. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation builds from standard tire models and handling diagrams without self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper establishes the saddle-point coordinate model explicitly from a nonlinear tire model combined with the handling diagram, incorporating road adhesion, velocity, steering angle, and yaw moment as independent inputs. The dual-envelope framework is then constructed from the resulting saddle-point properties and the stated convergence tendency under bounded inputs; this tendency is presented as a consequence of the phase-plane dynamics rather than a quantity fitted to or defined by the envelope itself. No predictions (e.g., tracking-error reductions) are shown to reduce by construction to parameters estimated from the same data, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatzes are imported via self-citation. The HIL experiments compare against an unconstrained NMPC baseline, supplying an external benchmark that is independent of the envelope construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

Central claim depends on standard vehicle dynamics models plus the novel envelope definitions; limited free parameters beyond standard inputs like adhesion coefficient and velocity.

free parameters (2)
  • road adhesion coefficient
    Explicitly included in saddle point model but treated as a variable input rather than fitted constant.
  • longitudinal velocity
    Accounted for in the model and varied across experiments.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Nonlinear tire model combined with handling diagram captures coupling among steering, yaw moment, and tire forces.
    Foundation for establishing the saddle point coordinate model.
  • ad hoc to paper State trajectories converge toward saddle points when steering and yaw-moment inputs remain bounded.
    Used to justify the outer envelope as a recoverable set.
invented entities (1)
  • Extended dual envelope framework no independent evidence
    purpose: Defines recoverable drifting region and non-drifting stability region in slip angle-yaw rate plane.
    New construction based on saddle point analysis.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5603 in / 1335 out tokens · 61719 ms · 2026-05-10T17:24:44.853528+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    IC3M: In-Car Multimodal Multi-Object Monitoring for Abnormal Status of Both Driver and Passengers,

    Z. Fang, Z. Lin, S. Hu, H. Cao, Y . Deng, X. Chen, and Y . Fang, “IC3M: In-Car Multimodal Multi-Object Monitoring for Abnormal Status of Both Driver and Passengers,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02592, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Channel Power Gain Es- timation for Terahertz Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Networks,

    Z. Lin, L. Wang, J. Ding, B. Tan, and S. Jin, “Channel Power Gain Es- timation for Terahertz Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Networks,”IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 155–159, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Mobile edge intelligence for large language models: A contemporary survey,

    G. Qu, Q. Chen, W. Wei, Z. Lin, X. Chen, and K. Huang, “Mobile edge intelligence for large language models: A contemporary survey,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Split Learning in 6G Edge Networks,

    Z. Lin, G. Qu, X. Chen, and K. Huang, “Split Learning in 6G Edge Networks,”IEEE Wirel. Commun., 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Rrto: A high-performance transparent offloading system for model inference in mobile edge computing,

    Z. Sun, X. Guan, Z. Lin, Y . Qing, H. Song, Z. Fang, Z. Chen, F. Liu, H. Cui, W. Niet al., “Rrto: A high-performance transparent offloading system for model inference in mobile edge computing,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.21739, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Handling- stability control for distributed drive electric vehicles via lyapunov-based nonlinear mpc algorithm,

    N. Guo, J. Liu, J. Li, W. Chen, Y . Zhang, Q. Lu, and Z. Chen, “Handling- stability control for distributed drive electric vehicles via lyapunov-based nonlinear mpc algorithm,”IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 6615–6628, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Integrated motion control of interaction safety, stability, and path- tracking for front-and-rear-independent-drive electric vehicle,

    X. H. Zeng, C. S. Duan, D. F. Song, Q. F. Qian, D. P. Yang, and X. M. Zhang, “Integrated motion control of interaction safety, stability, and path- tracking for front-and-rear-independent-drive electric vehicle,”IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 8573–8583, 2025

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Tracking and transmission design in terahertz v2i networks,

    Z. Lin, L. Wang, J. Ding, Y . Xu, and B. Tan, “Tracking and transmission design in terahertz v2i networks,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 3586–3598, 2022

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    Hierarchical control with steering mode switching for mded-hdv via maneuver stability region analysis,

    R. Fang, T. Shen, X. Bai, J. Liang, F. Wang, W. Zhuang, and G. Yin, “Hierarchical control with steering mode switching for mded-hdv via maneuver stability region analysis,”IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 22, pp. 23 066–23 082, 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    A novel nonlinear drift control for sharp turn of autonomous vehicles,

    F. Jia, H. Jing, and Z. Liu, “A novel nonlinear drift control for sharp turn of autonomous vehicles,”V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 490–510, 2024

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    Integrated combined-slip-based vehicle and wheel dynamic control for electric vehicles,

    E. Hashemi, “Integrated combined-slip-based vehicle and wheel dynamic control for electric vehicles,”IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 8907–8916, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    A multi-layer drifting controller for all-wheel drive vehicles beyond driving limits,

    X. Tian, S. Yang, Y . Yang, W. Song, and M. Fu, “A multi-layer drifting controller for all-wheel drive vehicles beyond driving limits,”IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 1229–1239, 2023

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Vehicle steady drifting control with safety boundary constraints,

    Z. Song, Y . Hua, Y . Zhuang, J. Zhao, Y . Wang, and X. Zhang, “Vehicle steady drifting control with safety boundary constraints,”Nonlinear Dyn., vol. 112, no. 20, pp. 18 235–18 254, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Sparse gaussian process-based strategies for two-layer model predictive control in autonomous vehicle drifting,

    C. Hu, Y . Xie, L. Xie, and M. Magno, “Sparse gaussian process-based strategies for two-layer model predictive control in autonomous vehicle drifting,”TRANSPORT RES C-EMER, vol. 174, p. 105065, 2025

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Analysis and control of high sideslip manoeuvres,

    C. V oser, R. Y . Hindiyeh, and J. C. Gerdes, “Analysis and control of high sideslip manoeuvres,”V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 48, no. S1, pp. 317–336, 2010

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    Control of a scaled vehicle in and beyond stable limit handling,

    M. Baars, H. Hellendoorn, and M. Alirezaei, “Control of a scaled vehicle in and beyond stable limit handling,”IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 6427–6437, 2021. JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, AUGUST 2021 10

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    A combined use of phase plane and handling diagram method to study the influence of tyre and vehicle characteristics on stability,

    F. Farroni, M. Russo, R. Russo, M. Terzo, and F. Timpone, “A combined use of phase plane and handling diagram method to study the influence of tyre and vehicle characteristics on stability,”V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 51, no. 8, pp. 1265–1285, 2013

    work page 2013

  18. [18]

    A novel model predictive controller for the drifting vehicle to track a circular trajectory,

    C. Hu, L. Xie, Z. Zhang, and H. Xiong, “A novel model predictive controller for the drifting vehicle to track a circular trajectory,”V ehicle System Dynamics, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 537–566, 2025

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    A new control approach for automated drifting in consideration of the driving characteristics of an expert human driver,

    E. Joa, H. Cha, Y . Hyun, Y . Koh, K. Yi, and J. Park, “A new control approach for automated drifting in consideration of the driving characteristics of an expert human driver,”Control Eng. Pract., vol. 96, p. 104293, 2020

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Vehicle drifting dynamics: discovery of new equilibria,

    S. Milani, H. Marzbani, and R. N. Jazar, “Vehicle drifting dynamics: discovery of new equilibria,”V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 1933–1958, 2022

    work page 1933

  21. [21]

    Phase portrait analysis and drifting control of unmanned tracked vehicles,

    H. Dong, H. Yu, and J. Xi, “Phase portrait analysis and drifting control of unmanned tracked vehicles,”IEEE Trans. Intell. V eh., vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 5650–5664, 2024

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Constructing critical control parameters to keep vehicle away from divergent loss of stability,

    V . Verbytskyy, M. Blundell, and V . Vantsevich, “Constructing critical control parameters to keep vehicle away from divergent loss of stability,”V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 670–694, 2025

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Research on optimal slip ratio of 4wid-ev considering lateral stability control and effective usage rate under combined-slip conditions,

    Z. Wang, C. Ma, Y . Li, and R. Wu, “Research on optimal slip ratio of 4wid-ev considering lateral stability control and effective usage rate under combined-slip conditions,”IEEE Rob. Autom. Lett., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1098– 1105, 2025

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    A survey of lateral stability criterion and control application for autonomous vehicles,

    Z. Zhu, X. Tang, Y . Qin, Y . Huang, and E. Hashemi, “A survey of lateral stability criterion and control application for autonomous vehicles,”IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 10 382–10 399, 2023

    work page 2023

  25. [26]

    H∞robust control of a novel dual-motor drive system and its application on stability enhancement of electric vehicles via torque vectoring,

    J. Wang, Z. Liu, C. Guan, Z. Zhou, B. Yang, and T. Zheng, “H∞robust control of a novel dual-motor drive system and its application on stability enhancement of electric vehicles via torque vectoring,”IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 8889–8902, 2025

    work page 2025

  26. [27]

    Vehicle control synthesis using phase portraits of planar dynamics,

    C. G. Bobier-Tiu, C. E. Beal, J. C. Kegelman, R. Y . Hindiyeh, and J. C. Gerdes, “Vehicle control synthesis using phase portraits of planar dynamics,” V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 1318–1337, 2019

    work page 2019

  27. [28]

    Autonomous drifting using torque vectoring: Innovating active safety,

    B. Lenzo, T. Goel, and J. C. Gerdes, “Autonomous drifting using torque vectoring: Innovating active safety,”IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 17 931–17 939, 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [29]

    J. Y . M. Goh,Automated vehicle control beyond the stability limits. Stanford University, 2019

    work page 2019

  29. [30]

    Vehicle motion control beyond and within the stability limits for 4wd electric vehicles,

    Y . Yu, W. Ji, R. Li, A. Lu, and G. Tian, “Vehicle motion control beyond and within the stability limits for 4wd electric vehicles,”IEEE Trans. Intell. V eh., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 2348–2363, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [31]

    Drift cornering control and real-vehicle deployment for electric vehicles,

    S. Zhao, J. Zhang, N. Masoud, Y . Jiang, H. Huang, and T. Liu, “Drift cornering control and real-vehicle deployment for electric vehicles,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 12, pp. 13 509–13 520, 2025

    work page 2025

  31. [32]

    Human-inspired au- tonomous racing in low friction environments,

    T. P. Weber, R. K. Aggarwal, and J. C. Gerdes, “Human-inspired au- tonomous racing in low friction environments,”IEEE Trans. Intell. V eh., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 3684–3696, 2025

    work page 2025

  32. [33]

    Exploiting linear structure for precision control of highly nonlinear vehicle dynamics,

    M. T. Peterson, T. Goel, and J. C. Gerdes, “Exploiting linear structure for precision control of highly nonlinear vehicle dynamics,”IEEE Trans. Intell. V eh., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1852–1862, 2022

    work page 2022

  33. [34]

    Enhanced active safety through integrated autonomous drifting and direct yaw moment control via nonlinear model predictive control,

    P. Stano, D. Tavernini, U. Montanaro, M. Tufo, G. Fiengo, L. Novella, and A. Sorniotti, “Enhanced active safety through integrated autonomous drifting and direct yaw moment control via nonlinear model predictive control,” IEEE Trans. Intell. V eh., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 4172–4190, 2023

    work page 2023

  34. [35]

    Autonomous obstacle avoidance for distributed drive electric vehicles via dynamic drifting,

    X. Zhao, G. Chen, Z. Gao, J. Yao, Z. Gao, and M. Hua, “Autonomous obstacle avoidance for distributed drive electric vehicles via dynamic drifting,”IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 8893–8906, 2024

    work page 2024

  35. [36]

    Modeling and control for dynamic drifting trajectories,

    T. P. Weber and J. C. Gerdes, “Modeling and control for dynamic drifting trajectories,”IEEE Trans. Intell. V eh., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 3731–3741, 2023

    work page 2023

  36. [37]

    A complete-state controller for dynamic drifting of distributed drive electric vehicles,

    G. Chen, X. Zhao, Z. Gao, M. Hua, and Z. Gao, “A complete-state controller for dynamic drifting of distributed drive electric vehicles,”IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 13 044–13 056, 2025

    work page 2025

  37. [38]

    Combined-slip trajectory tracking and yaw stability control for 4wid autonomous vehicles based on effective cornering stiffness,

    N. Xu, M. Hu, L. Jin, H. Ding, and Y . Huang, “Combined-slip trajectory tracking and yaw stability control for 4wid autonomous vehicles based on effective cornering stiffness,”IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 20 683–20 697, 2024

    work page 2024

  38. [39]

    Extended stability envelopes and effectiveness quantification for integrated chassis control with multiple actuator configurations in the energy phase plane,

    N. Xu, Z. Yin, Y . Zhang, and K. Guo, “Extended stability envelopes and effectiveness quantification for integrated chassis control with multiple actuator configurations in the energy phase plane,”IEEE T SYST MAN CY-S, vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 7472–7486, 2025

    work page 2025

  39. [40]

    An adaptive smc controller for evs with four iwms handling and stability enhancement based on a stability index,

    X. Li, N. Xu, K. Guo, and Y . Huang, “An adaptive smc controller for evs with four iwms handling and stability enhancement based on a stability index,”V eh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 1509–1532, 2021

    work page 2021