MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987721383 · doi:10.2514/6.2009-6954

Integration and Application of a Tool Chain for Environmental Analysis of Aircraft Flight Trajectories

2009· article· en· W1987721383 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lothar Bertsch, Gertjan Looye, Tom Otten, Markus Lummer

Bibliographic record

Venue9th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (ATIO) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPartenariat Canadien Contre Le CancerDeutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt
KeywordsAerospace engineeringChain (unit)Computer scienceAeronauticsSystems engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The German Aerospace Center (DLR) is currently developing a tool chain for the environmental analysis of aircraft flight trajectories. The presented tool chain consists of tools for aerodynamic analysis, engine cycle modelling, flight simulation, and aircraft noise prediction. The aircraft geometry is not modified within the process but provided as an input. The implemented tools come from specialized DLR institutes, are harmonized in input/output format and are integrated into one fully automated analysis process. The \nPHX ModelCenter framework allows for a DLR-wide accessible server/client architecture. \nThe new tool chain is applicable to evaluate arbitrary three dimensional flight trajectories. The focus of the presented work lies on the environmental analysis and optimization of \napproach and departure procedures. The predicted ground noise levels are compared to results from a dedicated DLR flyover noise campaign in 2009. A conventional approach, a \nsteep approach, and a new three dimensional approach procedure have been flight tested with DLR’s flying testbed ATTAS. The new procedure is referred to as Helical Noise Abatement Procedure (HeNAP) due to its helix shape. The ground noise measurements confirm the predicted noise concentration and relocation along the steep approach and the HeNAP compared to the conventional approach procedure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue9th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (ATIO)Same topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207