Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
Search is not available for this dataset
car1_strategy
float64
car2_strategy
float64
rival_response_time
float64
tyre_delta
float64
track_position_gap
float64
label_cascade
int64
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.7
0
0.28
0.3
0.36
0.4
0.62
0
0.36
0.38
0.44
0.46
0.55
0
0.42
0.45
0.5
0.52
0.48
0
0.55
0.58
0.62
0.6
0.4
1
0.6
0.64
0.68
0.66
0.34
1
0.66
0.7
0.74
0.72
0.28
1
0.72
0.76
0.8
0.78
0.22
1
0.58
0.62
0.7
0.68
0.32
1

F1 TeamStrategy–Coupling–RivalResponse–TyreDelta–Gap Cascade

A five-node coupling model for team-level strategic collapse in Formula 1.

This repository models how two-car strategy alignment, rival response speed, tyre delta, and track position gap interact to produce non-linear outcome cascades.

It shifts analysis from single-car optimisation to multi-agent interaction geometry.


What This Repo Demonstrates

You can:

• Score a two-car strategic state for cascade risk
• Identify interaction drivers of team-level instability
• Compare coordinated vs split strategies
• Estimate distance to strategic collapse boundary
• Export structured stability reports

The dataset is synthetic.
It demonstrates the geometry of multi-agent instability.


Core Five-Node Set

• car1_strategy
• car2_strategy
• rival_response_time
• tyre_delta
• track_position_gap

This is a coupled decision system.

The model captures how:

Aligned aggressive strategies → increased coupling risk
Fast rival response → compressed decision windows
Tyre delta mismatch → pace asymmetry
Small track position gaps → amplified timing consequences

Collapse emerges from interaction across both cars and rivals.


Prediction Target

label_cascade

• 0 = Stable team strategy state
• 1 = Team-level cascade region reached

A cascade represents:

Loss of both cars’ track position
Undercut chain amplification
Intra-team interference
Strategic dead-end state


Row Structure

Each row is a normalized race snapshot (0.0–1.0 scale).

car1_strategy
Higher values indicate aggressive or delayed commitment

car2_strategy
Higher values indicate similar commitment increasing coupling

rival_response_time
Higher values indicate faster competitive reaction

tyre_delta
Higher values indicate larger tyre performance mismatch

track_position_gap
Lower values indicate tighter pack compression


Use Cases

Two-Car Strategy Design

Evaluate whether to split or align pit windows.

Rival Reaction Analysis

Quantify risk under rapid competitor response.

Multi-Agent Boundary Mapping

Identify when team coupling creates instability.

What-If Strategic Exploration

Test small adjustments in timing or tyre choice.
Measure impact on cascade probability.


What Makes This Different

vs Single-Car Strategy Models

This models two-car interaction explicitly.

vs Deterministic Decision Trees

It evaluates instability surfaces rather than scripted branches.

vs Outcome Simulation Only

Simulation predicts finishing position.
This predicts collapse risk.


Example Output

Input Strategic State

{
  "car1_strategy": 0.44,
  "car2_strategy": 0.48,
  "rival_response_time": 0.52,
  "tyre_delta": 0.54,
  "track_position_gap": 0.46
}
Risk Assessment
{
  "cascade_probability": 0.41,
  "risk_band": "AMBER"
}
Boundary Interpretation

If rival_response_time decreases (faster response) and track_position_gap narrows:

Cascade probability can exceed 0.75.

Distance-to-RED can be estimated via L1 / L2 perturbation norms.

Batch Testing Capability

Compare multiple team strategies:

def batch_test(strategies: list) -> list:
    results = []
    for s in strategies:
        risk = score(s)
        results.append((s, risk))
    results.sort(key=lambda x: x[1]["cascade_probability"], reverse=True)
    return results

Applications:

• Compare split vs aligned pit windows
• Evaluate aggressive vs conservative team play
• Rank coordinated race plans by stability margin

Exportable Stability Reports

Structured reporting supports:

• Strategy room reviews
• Pre-race documentation
• Post-race analysis
• Governance and audit trail

Example concept:

def export_report(state, risk, boundary_configs, mitigations):
    report = {
        "configuration": state,
        "risk_assessment": risk,
        "boundary_configs": boundary_configs,
        "mitigations": mitigations
    }
    return report
Files

data/train.csv
Synthetic training data

data/tester.csv
Evaluation dataset

scorer.py
Outputs:

• accuracy
• precision
• recall
• f1
• confusion matrix

Evaluation

Run:

python scorer.py

Scope

This repository demonstrates five-node coupling geometry using synthetic data.

It does not represent calibrated team telemetry.

Small samples reveal structure.
Production-scale data determines operational exposure.

Production Direction

Production deployment enables:50K–1M row telemetry-calibrated datasets
• Real-time team-level stability scoring
• Multi-car coordination monitoring
• Early warning before strategic cascade
• Integration into race engineering dashboards

License

MIT

Structural Note
This dataset identifies a measurable coupling pattern associated with systemic instability.
The sample demonstrates the geometry.
Production-scale data determines operational exposure.

Enterprise & Research Collaboration
Clarus develops production-scale coherence monitoring infrastructure for motorsport, healthcare, finance, infrastructure, and AI systems.

team@clarusinvariant.com

Instability is detectable.
Boundaries are measurable.
Downloads last month
15