MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128852230 · doi:10.2514/1.29061

Modeling and Simulation of Airship Dynamics

2007· article· en· W2128852230 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

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

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Guidance Control and Dynamics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerospace engineeringComputer scienceDynamics (music)Flight dynamicsAeronauticsAerodynamicsSimulationEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a modeling approach for the nonlinear dynamics simulation of airships. The flight mechanics, aerostatics, and aerodynamics are incorporated into the model. A comprehensive estimation method is provided for the aerodynamics, including added-mass terms, viscous effect, forces on the fins, forces on the hull due to the fins, and axial drag. A simulation program is developed from the dynamics model and applied to analyze the control responses of the Skyship-500 airship. A comparison between the simulation and flight test results for different control inputs shows that the dynamics simulation gives a reasonable estimation of the flight behavior. The dynamics model is then linearized using a finite difference approach and the linear model is applied to investigate the stability of longitudinal and lateral motion at various speeds. With the trust gained from validation, the dynamics model and simulation program can be used to evaluate the flight and control performance of other airships.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.199 · 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