MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2225779169 · doi:10.4271/2001-01-2965

Advanced Real-time Aerodynamic Model Identification Technique

2001· article· en· W2225779169 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kenneth Hui, Carl Swail, B.W. Leach

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsIdentification (biology)Computer scienceAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">The Flight Research Laboratory (FRL), National Research Council (NRC) of Canada is currently developing an in-flight aircraft aerodynamic model identification technique that determines the small perturbation model at a given test condition. Initial demonstrations have been carried out using the NRC Falcon 20 research aircraft. An efficient system architecture, in terms of both software algorithms and hardware processing, has been designed to meet the stringent near real-time requirements of an in-flight system. As well, novel hardware and software techniques are being applied to the calibration and measurement of the fundamental in-flight parameters, such as air data. The small perturbation models are then combined to develop a global model of the aircraft that is validated by comparing the model response to flight data. The maneuvers were performed according to the FAA Acceptance Test Guide (ATG). In-flight model development and validation is an innovative application of parameter estimation. Flight testing of the parameter estimation system resulted in a model that matches the Falcon 20 aircraft very well. The longitudinal and lateral derivatives were computed within 2 and 8 seconds, respectively, of completion of the flight test maneuver.</div>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.228
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207