MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1523679429 · doi:10.5220/0002885701140124

MORPHING WING REAL TIME OPTIMIZATION IN WIND TUNNEL TESTS

2010· article· en· W1523679429 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrei Vladimir Popov, Ruxandra Mihaela Botez, Youssef Mébarki

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsortium de Recherche et d’innovation en Aérospatiale au Québec
KeywordsMorphingWind tunnelWingComputer scienceAerospace engineeringAeronauticsMarine engineeringEngineeringComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, wind tunnel results of a real time optimization of a morphing wing in wind tunnel for delaying the transition towards the trailing edge are presented. A morphing rectangular finite aspect ratio wing, having a wind tunnel experimental airfoil reference cross-section, was considered with its upper surface made of a flexible composite material and instrumented with Kulite pressure sensors, and two smart memory alloys actuators. Several wind tunnel tests runs for various Mach numbers, angles of attack and Reynolds numbers were performed in the 6'x9' wind tunnel at the Institute for Aerospace Research at the National Research Council Canada. Unsteady pressure signals were recorded and used as feed back in real time control while the morphing wing was requested to reproduce various optimized airfoils by changing automatically the two actuators strokes. The paper shows the optimization method implemented into the control software code that allows the morphing wing to adjust its shape to an optimum configuration under the wind tunnel airflow conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207