MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020844079 · doi:10.1115/gt2012-68632

Determination of Steady State Gas Turbine Operation

2012· article· en· W2020844079 on OpenAlexafffund
Craig R. Davison

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersMinistère de la Défense NationaleNational Research Council CanadaDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsTurbofanSteady state (chemistry)Jet engineBenchmark (surveying)TurbopropComputer scienceTurbineInterval (graph theory)Control theory (sociology)Test dataSimulationAutomotive engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repeatable measurement of engine performance requires the system to be near steady state. A technique is presented to assess how close engine operation is to steady state. It estimates the rate of change of the assessed parameter across the sample time and provides an associated confidence interval. This allows a minimum amount of test time to characterize performance and provides consistent criteria to assess steady state. The technique can either be used online to determine when to take a steady state point or to find the optimal sample from a given data set. To make the technique feasible during testing a recursive method is developed to minimize the computational time. The technique is demonstrated on known functions with random noise to benchmark its capabilities. This is followed by a demonstration on test data from a small turbo jet engine operated in an altitude facility, a turboprop on an outdoor test stand and an after-burning turbofan in an indoor test cell.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Sensor Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207