MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085902081 · doi:10.1109/syscon.2012.6189501

A simulation System of Systems to assess military aircraft protection

2012· article· en· W2085902081 on OpenAlexaff
Pascal Boily, Nathalie Harrison

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSystems engineeringComponent (thermodynamics)Key (lock)Process (computing)Software engineeringSystem of systemsWorkflowVariety (cybernetics)TraceabilityReusabilitySoftwareDistributed computingEmbedded systemEngineeringSystems designOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A simulation-based System of Systems (SoS), called a Virtual Proving Ground (VPG), is being developed as a comprehensive and robust approach to support aircraft protection engineering and training. For more than 20 years, laboratories and specialized equipment were developed and operated for the evaluation of aircraft self-protection. Most of these systems were originally designed on a standalone basis to answer specific questions. On the other hand, operational requests followed an ad-hoc process that did not allow traceability and knowledge management. As these systems are complementary, their integration came as a logical path to increase the capability. This paper presents an overview of the VPG SoS, including the individual systems, the common architecture framework and the services that are key to a comprehensive approach: collaborative tools and computer-assisted processes. The paper also introduces the SoS inner capability to evolve and discusses the benefits of the approach. The VPG links hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) systems within a common virtual environment. The simulation includes not only services like time and error management, but also a robust execution engine that allows the execution of a broad variety of digital models. It was designed to facilitate reusability by flexible composition schemes and standardized interfaces. Like building blocks, the SoS allows the substitution of digital models with their HWIL counterparts. The decision to use a digital or hardware component must be based on the requirements for a specific level of fidelity or performance. The SoS extends beyond the sole integration of software and hardware systems. It also includes a set of collaborative tools with associated processes, and implements an overarching verification and validation methodology. The collaborative tools are developed to facilitate the communication and interaction, and bring a cultural change within the operational community. More than just a database or a portal, it unifies the way requests are managed by the stakeholders by clarifying the roles and responsibilities; it centralizes data from databases that were up to now located in different places; and finally, it greatly fosters knowledge management and robust problem solving within the organization.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207