Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper evaluates the effectiveness of Rolling Split Conformal Prediction for pre-incident detection of traction loss in racing vehicles, utilizing a Random Forest model to monitor non-conformity residuals. Despite the methodological rigor, the approach yielded a mean precision and recall of essentially 0.0 across 19 drivers and 55,563 telemetry samples, indicating a high false-alarm rate of 15.3% that renders it impractical for early warning applications. The study highlights the violation of the exchangeability assumption in residual autocorrelation as a potential cause for these results, providing critical insights into the limitations of current predictive methods in this context.
Rolling Split Conformal Prediction fails to deliver actionable pre-incident warnings for traction loss, flagging over 15% of samples as anomalous without any true positive detections.
Conventional traction control architectures intervene only after the adhesion limit of a tire has already been breached. This paper investigates whether Rolling Split Conformal Prediction , monitoring the volatility of non-conformity residuals from a per-driver Random Forest model of expected slip behavior , can serve as a statistically grounded pre-incident warning signal, ahead of gross traction loss. Unlike an earlier internal draft of this work, the evaluation reported here corrects a confound in the slip proxy (vehicle speed is included as an explicit model feature, not left implicit in the target's denominator), uses every racing lap for each driver rather than only the fastest lap, and is scored against real, timestamped incident labels extracted from FIA Race Control Messages and track-limits lap deletions rather than narrated post-hoc. The result is negative: across 19 drivers and 55,563 test-phase telemetry samples, the rolling-volatility detector achieves a mean precision of essentially 0.0 and mean recall of 0.0 against 14 ground-truth incidents, while flagging on average 15.3% of all samples as anomalous , too high a false-alarm rate for any early-warning use. A static 95th-percentile threshold baseline performs no better in any way that would justify the added complexity of the conformal-volatility formulation. Residual autocorrelation diagnostics show the split-conformal exchangeability assumption is violated for every driver (Ljung-Box p<0.001, n = 19/19), which is one plausible driver of the high false-alarm rate. We report this as a methodologically rigorous negative finding, diagnose its likely causes, and outline what a genuinely predictive version of this approach would require.
