MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991437287 · doi:10.1177/107754630100700606

Calculus Model for a Rolling Guided Missile

2001· article· en· W1991437287 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vibration and Control · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMissileDecoupling (probability)LinearizationScheme (mathematics)Computer scienceMissile guidanceRotation (mathematics)Control theory (sociology)Calculus (dental)Control engineeringEngineeringMathematicsNonlinear systemControl (management)Aerospace engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents the relations that form the basis for the calculus models needed to study rolling guided missiles. The equations of the general motion are written within the Resal trihedral in a way that allows, after linearization, one to draw up a structural scheme of the controlled object, a scheme that will be used in the guided missile system analysis. Opposite to the flying machines with stabilized roll where the analysis is done after decoupling the channels, for the missile with rotation, the analysis of the scheme is done simultaneously on both channels, as terms used are complex terms. Furthermore, there will be presented some characteristics of this type of missile by analyzing a model close to the one of an antichariot missile with gasodynamic control.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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