MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052441561 · doi:10.1109/med.2007.4433847

Chaos in nonlinear dynamic systems: Helicopter vibration mechanisms

2007· article· en· W2052441561 on OpenAlexaff
James Taylor, S.S. Sharif

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicChaos control and synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLyapunov exponentDynamical systems theoryNonlinear systemChaoticSeries (stratigraphy)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceCorrelation dimensionChaos theoryTime seriesAccelerationMathematicsPhysicsFractalArtificial intelligenceFractal dimensionMathematical analysisClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nonlinear dynamic behavior of a helicopter is considered in this paper, using only real-time flight data analysis. The main objective of this study is to characterize the vibration mechanism(s). based on the analysis of the time-series data of the dynamical system, specifically acceleration for two different airspeeds with a sampling rate of 1024 Hz. We explore the possibility of the presence of chaotic behavior in the time-series data, using a systematic, detailed approach. Some background in the theory of chaos in nonlinear dynamical systems is discussed, and techniques for the identification of chaos in time-series data are presented. Several topics including delay-coordinate embedding theory, delay time and dimension calculation, and Lyapunov exponent computation for chaotic systems are described. In each section, time-series data sets from the helicopter are analyzed and examined: in some sections classical examples such as the Henon Map and Lorenz System are also considered to provide illustrative results. Finally, implications regarding the possibility of chaotic behavior in the dynamical system is discussed, and the next steps in this study 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 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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChaos control and synchronizationFrench-language works237,207