MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167742839 · doi:10.2514/6.2001-4170

A practical investigation of a takeoff performance monitor for turboprop aircraft

2001· article· en· W2167742839 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

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTakeoffTurbopropAeronauticsAerospace engineeringTakeoff and landingComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of an aircraft Takeoff Performance Monitoring System (TOPMS) is to provide to the pilot information pertaining to the level of safety with which a takeoff is proceeding. The concept of a TOPMS is not new. Instruments have been developed and flight tested, however the inclusion of a TOPMS as a standard instrument has yet to be embraced by manufacturers and operators. The authors have investigated the feasibility of using an observer system during the roll and takeoff phase of aircraft operation to provide to the pilot the information that is needed to manoeuver safely. Unlike previous work in this field, this investigation focussed on various factors that are unique to the far-northern environment. Further, the Global Positioning System(GPS) was proposed as the sole source of kinematic information. This provided the possibility that a TOPMS could be devised that would require no additional ground-based installation. A theoretical dynamic model of an aircraft in contact with the ground appears in AIAA 2001-4374, together with an uncertainty analysis and a description of the signal processing technique. A GPS receiver and data acquisition system were installed in an aircraft

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · 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