Temperature Variation of Optical Sensors on a wing during wind tunnel tests
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, wind tunnel measurements are presented for the airflow fluctuation detection using pressure optical sensors. A number of 21 wind tunnel test runs for various Mach numbers, angles of attack and Reynolds numbers were performed in the 6’×9’ wind tunnel at the Institute for Aerospace Research at the National Research Council Canada (IAR/NRC). A rectangular finite aspect ratio half wing, having a NACA 4415 cross-section, was considered with its upper surface instrumented with pressure taps, pressure optical sensors and one Kulite transducer. The Mach number was varied from 0.1 to 0.3 and the angles of attack range was within -3 to 3. Unsteady pressure signals were recorded and a thorough comparison, in terms of unsteady and mean pressure coefficients, was performed between the measurements from the three sets of the pressure transducers. Temperature corrections were considered in the pressure measurements by optical sensors. Comparisons were also performed against theoretical predictions using XFoil CFD code, and mean errors smaller than 10% was noticed between the measured and the predicted data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it