MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540112820 · doi:10.4271/2007-01-3286

The Effect of Wing Leading Edge Contamination on the Stall Characteristics of Aircraft

2007· article· en· W1540112820 on OpenAlexaff
Clinton E. Tanner

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
FundersVolvo Research and Educational Foundations
KeywordsStall (fluid mechanics)WingAerospace engineeringLeading edgeAeronauticsContaminationEnvironmental scienceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer scienceEngineeringTelecommunicationsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lessons learned from analysis of in-service icing incidents are described. The airfoil and wing design factors that define an aircraft's natural stall characteristics are explored, including the aerodynamic effects of contamination. Special attention is given to contamination in the form of “roughness” along wing leading edges typical of frost. In addition, the key aerodynamic effects of ground proximity and sideslip/crosswind during the take-off rotation are described. An empirical method, that can be used to predict a wing's sensitivity to wing leading edge roughness, is demonstrated. The paper explores the in-service differences of aircraft that incorporate “hard”, “supercritical” and “slatted” wings. The paper attempts to explain why the statistical evidence appears to favor the slatted wing for winter operations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207