Path Tracking Control Based on T-S Fuzzy Model for Autonomous Vehicles with Yaw Angle and Heading Angle
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper is an interesting topic with significance in theoretical and practical contexts. The paper is also well structured and easy to understand. However, some comments or modifications are recommended to be addressed in order to improve the quality.
1/ First of all, the title of paper is not clear. What is deference between Yaw Angle and Heading Angle. Please revise the title.
2/ According to the guide of authors the word limits in the journal Machines is 200. The abstract is too long. Adjust to the limit.
3/ In the abstract, the words “Membership function” should be “membership function”.
4/ Some abbreviations such as LMI (line 263), LQR (line 212) must be explained.
5/ All formulas, parameters, and coordinates used in equations should be explained in a nomenclature. This will help readers to better understand the paper.
6/ To improve the effectiveness of the introduction in your study, I suggest highlighting the novelty and originality of your work, as well as improving the contribution section. It's important to include new works related to your study in the literature review, such as the design of an LMI-based fuzzy fast terminal sliding mode control approach for uncertain MIMO systems, h-infinity robust LMI-based nonlinear state feedback controller of uncertain nonlinear systems with external disturbances, learning-based control of autonomous vehicles using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system, and the linear matrix inequality approach. Furthermore, the introduction section should clearly state the motivation behind the manuscript.
7/ Some assumptions that applied to vehicle system should be mentioned in the paper.
8/ To improve clarity, I recommend that the authors include a block diagram of the proposed method. Additionally, they may want to provide the steps required to implement the algorithms.
9/ Did authors consider the disturbance forces acting on the vehicle such as model uncertainties and disturbance?
10/ It is important to acknowledge possible limitations of the proposed approach in the results discussion section. A thorough discussion highlighting the limitations of the method is necessary.
11/ In the simulation section of this paper, there is a need for more comparison with existing related research results. The author should add additional comparison results. It would also be beneficial if figures are added to show the comparison of the proposed controller with just an H_inf controller and just a T-S Fuzzy controller.
12/ The conclusion should include future scope of the work.
13/ The text needs further refinement to avoid grammatical errors, such as incorrect use of articles and singular/plural.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The text needs further refinement to avoid grammatical errors, such as incorrect use of articles and singular/plural.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this paper, a path tracking control algorithm is proposed for transportation vehicles traveling on roads. From the simulation the algorithm of this paper seems to achieve the desired results. However, I still have some suggestions and questions for the author to consider and this paper should be major revised before making the final decision.
1. The title of the paper mentions the use of yaw angle but from the abstract it appears that this paper only uses heading angle as a basis for modeling. So is the title or the abstract of the paper appropriate? The authors should re-title it appropriately.
2. There are problems with words being used incorrectly in the paper, for example, in the abstract “control rate” should be “control law”. The authors should carefully work out what they are trying to say and correct any similar errors that exist in the paper.
3. The presence of a large number of overly lengthy sentences in the paper reduces the readability of this paper. This is not appropriate for an academic paper and the writer should reorganize the sentences to make the paper clear and understandable.
4. What does β stand for in Figure 1? Every symbol that appears in the paper should be explained to the reader. At the same time, the pictures of the results of the simulation lacked the relevant legends.
5. Why does the system's loss function only consider yaw angle and not heading angle? Is this a reasonable design? Or does the heading angle have no effect on the accuracy of the control?
6. Does Figure 11 show whether the tracking error of the display is already the steady state error? It can be seen that the absolute value of the error reaches a maximum of 3 degrees, could this have serious consequences in the case of a very fast vehicle?
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageIn this paper, a path tracking control algorithm is proposed for transportation vehicles traveling on roads. From the simulation the algorithm of this paper seems to achieve the desired results. However, I still have some suggestions and questions for the author to consider and this paper should be major revised before making the final decision.
1. The title of the paper mentions the use of yaw angle but from the abstract it appears that this paper only uses heading angle as a basis for modeling. So is the title or the abstract of the paper appropriate? The authors should re-title it appropriately.
2. There are problems with words being used incorrectly in the paper, for example, in the abstract “control rate” should be “control law”. The authors should carefully work out what they are trying to say and correct any similar errors that exist in the paper.
3. The presence of a large number of overly lengthy sentences in the paper reduces the readability of this paper. This is not appropriate for an academic paper and the writer should reorganize the sentences to make the paper clear and understandable.
4. What does β stand for in Figure 1? Every symbol that appears in the paper should be explained to the reader. At the same time, the pictures of the results of the simulation lacked the relevant legends.
5. Why does the system's loss function only consider yaw angle and not heading angle? Is this a reasonable design? Or does the heading angle have no effect on the accuracy of the control?
6. Does Figure 11 show whether the tracking error of the display is already the steady state error? It can be seen that the absolute value of the error reaches a maximum of 3 degrees, could this have serious consequences in the case of a very fast vehicle?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsa path-tracking control technique based on the T-S fuzzy model of heading angle vehicle autonomy is presented in this study.
contributions and novelties compared to the papers in introduction are not clear.
comparison with the state of the arts path tracking control is missing in simulation section.
computation load of your control needs to be analyzed in detail. is it possible to run your method in real time?
what is the effect of environments, such as rain, snow, or sloped road?
what is the effect of sudden front obstacles, such as human, while the vehicle moves?
what is the version of matlab in simulations?
can you simulate lane change?
the effect of using T-S is not clear from figures in simulation/experiment section.
Comments on the Quality of English Languageok
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper presents an innovative and robust approach to a common shortcoming in existing vehicle-road models. The authors take into account the lateral slip angle, which can increase the accuracy of route tracking under high slip conditions. The paper aims to improve autonomous vehicle path control, but this increases complexity and the need for precise calibration of parameters as these may limit the practical applicability of the model in real driving situations.
A T-S fuzzy model is used as novel aspects for trajectory optimization. This fuzzy model integrates longitudinal velocity variations and addresses the specific vehicle heading angle and dynamics to optimize trajectory control.
When improving the dynamic performance, the following were considered: defining a global objective function based on the augmented heading angle and drift error system and constraining the eigenvalues of the system to a fixed circular region.
The authors rely on the fact that high adaptability to varying dynamic conditions is achieved by introducing robust H∞ control that optimizes the control rate as a function of vehicle parameter variations.
In order to validate the dynamic model and the control techniques respectively the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms the paper presents various hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulations and experiments in MATLAB and Simulink development environment. Solid data of the performance of the control methods results from the simulations. The results show an improvement in path accuracy with reduced lateral and angle errors compared to other models.
However, problems arise in terms of increased complexity of the T-S fuzzy model and H∞ control algorithms. This complexity makes it difficult to implement and optimize them in real autonomous vehicle control systems. In vehicles computational resources and response time are critical respectively high computational power increases the cost price of the product.
Another problem is that although the study demonstrates improvements in trajectory control, it is not clear how well these results generalize to different road conditions and with different vehicle types.
Another problem is that the proposed model is highly dependent on the accuracy and availability of measurements of specific parameters such as skid angle and longitudinal speed. These parameters are difficult to obtain accurately under real traffic conditions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI would like to express my gratitude to the authors for considering all of my comments. Therefore, I recommend that the paper be accepted for publication.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI have no more comment. Please mind the Percent match: 26%
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageI have no more comment. Please mind the Percent match: 26%
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI am satisfied with revision ok
Comments on the Quality of English Languageok
