Selected Data Set from Static and Rolling Experiments on a 65 Deg. Delta Wing at High Incidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This data set is selected from an extensive set of experimental results obtained for configurations with a 650 delta wing under static as well as large-amplitude high-rate rolling or pitching conditions at high incidence. The experiments were performed under a joint research program on "Non-Linear Aerodynamics under Dynamic Maneuvers" by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC (IAR)), the U.S. Air Force (USAF (AFOSR, AFRL)) and the Canadian Dept. for National Defence (DND). NASA Ames informally participated in the program through its substantial CFD work on specific test conditions. The experimental results provide both detail pressure measurements and a wide range of flow conditions covering from simple attached flow, through fully developed vortex and vortex burst flow, up to fully-stalled flow at very high incidence. Since this data set includes different levels of physical difficulty, the computational researchers wording in unsteady aerodynamics can use it as a staircase approach to the problem of validating their corresponding code Four schematic and representative configurations' were selected in the experiments (Fig. 1 to Fig. 3):
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".