MétaCan
Menu
← all works

A<scp>ERODYNAMICS OF</scp>S<scp>MALL</scp>V<scp>EHICLES</scp>

2002· article· en· 632 citations· W2128098791 on OpenAlex· 10.1146/annurev.fluid.35.101101.161102

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.
Canadian funderA Canadian agency funded it. The work may carry no Canadian affiliation at all.

Full frame distilled prediction

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.

Candidate categories
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: Not applicable
Genre
Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score
0.122
Threshold uncertainty score
0.999
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread
0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
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

Abstract

▪ Abstract In this review we describe the aerodynamic problems that must be addressed in order to design a successful small aerial vehicle. The effects of Reynolds number and aspect ratio (AR) on the design and performance of fixed-wing vehicles are described. The boundary-layer behavior on airfoils is especially important in the design of vehicles in this flight regime. The results of a number of experimental boundary-layer studies, including the influence of laminar separation bubbles, are discussed. Several examples of small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in this regime are described. Also, a brief survey of analytical models for oscillating and flapping-wing propulsion is presented. These range from the earliest examples where quasi-steady, attached flow is assumed, to those that account for the unsteady shed vortex wake as well as flow separation and aeroelastic behavior of a flapping wing. Experiments that complemented the analysis and led to the design of a successful ornithopter are also described.

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.

The record

Venue
Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics
Topic
Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Field
Engineering
Canadian institutions
University of Toronto
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Keywords
Aerospace engineeringAerodynamicsFlappingAirfoilWakeWingLaminar flowReynolds numberBoundary layerAeroelasticityFlow separationFlow (mathematics)Separation (statistics)VortexPropulsive efficiencyPhysicsPropulsionComputer scienceMechanicsEngineeringTurbulence
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes