MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043224970 · doi:10.1155/2011/937629

Survey of European and Major ISC Facilities for Supporting Mars and Sample Return Mission Aerothermodynamics and Tests Required for Thermal Protection System and Dynamic Stability

2011· article· en· W2043224970 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mathilde Bugel, Philippe Reynier, Arthur Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Aerospace Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGas Dynamics and Kinetic Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramHypersonic speedAerospace engineeringAerodynamicsEngineeringAeronauticsUpgradeSample (material)Exploration of MarsSpace Shuttle thermal protection systemRollover (web design)Environmental scienceSystems engineeringAstrobiologyComputer scienceThermalMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the frame of future sample return missions to Mars, asteroids, and comets, investigated by the European Space Agency, a review of the actual aerodynamics and aerothermodynamics capabilities in Europe for Mars entry of large vehicles and high-speed Earth reentry of sample return capsule has been undertaken. Additionally, capabilities in Canada and Australia for the assessment of dynamic stability, as well as major facilities for hypersonic flows available in ISC, have been included. This paper provides an overview of European current capabilities for aerothermodynamics and testing of thermal protection systems. This assessment has allowed the identification of the needs in new facilities or upgrade of existing ground tests for covering experimentally Mars entries and Earth high-speed reentries as far as aerodynamics, aerothermodynamics, and thermal protection system testing are concerned.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Aerospace EngineeringSame topicGas Dynamics and Kinetic TheoryFrench-language works237,207