MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999368699 · doi:10.2514/2.5106

Nonlinear Statistical Approach for Aeroelastic Response Prediction

2003· article· en· W1999368699 on OpenAlexaff
Cristina Popescu, Yau Shu Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Guidance Control and Dynamics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersTexas A and M University
KeywordsAeroelasticityNonlinear systemControl theory (sociology)Kalman filterAirfoilExtended Kalman filterComputer scienceFlutterEngineeringAerodynamicsArtificial intelligenceStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aging aircraft and combat aircraft that carry heavy external stores potentially face problems arising from nonlinearities in structure. An expert data mining system is proposed that is capable of predicting the asymptotic behavior of an aeroelastic system with structural nonlinearities represented by polynomial restoring forces or freeplay models. The input is represented only by a limited set of transient data. The output provides a long-term nonlinear aeroelastic response, and the prediction is made when certain rule-based reasoning conditions are satisfied. An attractive feature of this new approach is that no information about the system parameters is needed. In the prediction module, we propose two methods, based on nonlinear time series models and the unscented Kalman filter. To our knowledge, these approaches have not been reported so far for predicting the long-term nonlinear aeroelastic responses. Compared with the classical extended Kalman filter, the unscented filter does not require differentiability and can be applied to nonlinear aeroelastic models with freeplay and hysteresis. The performances of the expert data mining system are demonstrated for simulated data and wind-tunnel experimental aeroelastic data resulting from a two-degree-of-freedom airfoil oscillating in pitch and plunge.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Guidance Control and DynamicsSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207