MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995661566 · doi:10.4271/2011-01-2564

ARP4754A/ ED-79A - Guidelines for Development of Civil Aircraft and Systems - Enhancements, Novelties and Key Topics

2011· article· en· W1995661566 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Landi, Mark Nicholson

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Aerospace · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)AeronauticsComputer scienceAerospace engineeringSystems engineeringEngineeringOperations researchComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">ARP4754A/ED-79A guidelines addresse the development cycle for aircraft and systems that implement aircraft functions. The current trend in system design is an increasing level of integration between aircraft functions and the systems that implement them. While there can be considerable value gained when integrating systems with other systems, the increased complexity yields increased possibilities for errors, particularly with functions that are performed jointly across multiple systems. Following the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) recommendations to respond to this increased integration which referenced ARP4754/ED-79 in advisory materials for compliance to 14CFR/CS 25.1309 (see AMC 25.1309, published in 2002 and AC25.1309-Arsenal draft) the use of ARP4754A/ED79A in aircraft certification has become increasingly widespread.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">This presentation constitutes a comparison between the documents SAE [<span class="xref">1</span>] / EUROCAE [<span class="xref">2</span>] and SAE [<span class="xref">3</span>] / EUROCAE [<span class="xref">4</span>]; it highlights ARP4754A/ED79A enhancements, novelties and key topics (e.g. Development Assurance Level Assignment FDAL & IDAL).</div></div>

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0080.004
Research integrity0.0290.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0920.199

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations82
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of AerospaceSame topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207