MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012300203 · doi:10.1088/0964-1726/16/4/035

Aircraft flight parameter detection based on a neural network using multiple hot-film flow speed sensors

2007· article· en· W2012300203 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Haiping Fei, Rong Zhu, Zhaoying Zhou, Jindong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAirspeedWind tunnelArtificial neural networkAngle of attackFlight control surfacesWind speedEngineeringAerospace engineeringAirflowMicro air vehicleWingFlow (mathematics)SimulationControl theory (sociology)AerodynamicsAutomotive engineeringAcousticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Mechanical engineeringMechanicsPhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air speed, the angle of attack and the angle of sideslip are fundamental parameters in the control of flying bodies. Conventional detection techniques use sensors that may protrude outside the aircraft and be too bulky and intrusive for small unmanned air vehicles and micro air vehicles. In this paper, a novel and practical methodology by which the flight parameters are inferred from multiple hot-film flow speed sensors mounted on the surface of the wing is presented. In order to get a good mathematical relation between the readings of the sensors and the flight parameters, we use a back-propagation neural network to model the relationship. The methodology is validated by wind tunnel experiments, and the experimental results are presented.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations46
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsFrench-language works237,207