MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148495027 · doi:10.5539/mas.v2n4p33

Manpower Management Benefits Predictor Method for Aircraft Two Level Maintenance Concept

2008· article· en· W2148495027 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuanda Wang, Bifeng Song

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputerized maintenance management systemAircraft maintenanceComputer scienceOperations managementOperations researchManagement systemPlanned maintenanceProcess (computing)Reliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessPreventive maintenanceEngineeringAeronautics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In maintenance management process of aircraft, how to use the lesser maintenance manpower to get in return the higher maintenance Benefits, it is a problem that the management specialists pay more attention to, so, manpower management and cost estimate are the important compose parts of aircraft Life Cycle Costs (LCC) management. Via improve the maintenance level of aircraft, predigesting maintenance system from three level to two level maintenance (TLM) could save manpower, improve readiness, achieve the goal of bring favorable maintenance management Benefits. We imported gray system Verhulst model theory, established the manpower management forecast model for transforming maintenance system, and predicted according to the actual save manpower data of the United State Air Force. It is proved that the creditability of the prediction model is higher, has certain practical value.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207