MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2238197990 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511844652.009

Undercarriage

2010· book-chapter· en· W2238197990 on OpenAlexaff
Ajoy Kumar Kundu

Bibliographic record

VenueAircraft Design · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overview Chapter 6 illustrates how to arrive at a preliminary aircraft configuration of a new project starting from scratch, with the expectancy of satisfying the market specification. To progress further, the next task is to lay out the undercarriage (also known as the landing gear) position relative to the aircraft CG, which is accurately established in Chapter 8. This chapter addresses the undercarriage quite extensively but not the detailed design; rather, it focuses on those aspects related to undercarriage layout and sizing during the conceptual study phase. More details on undercarriage design are in the cited references. This chapter first introduces the undercarriage to serve vehicle ground handling, followed by basic definitions, terminologies, and information used in the design process and integration with an aircraft. Finally, methodologies for layout of the undercarriage and tire sizing are presented to complete the aircraft configuration generated thus far. Considerable attention is required to lay out the undercarriage position and to determine tire size and geometric details to avoid hazards during operation. This book limits the topic to the fundamentals to the extent of the requirements for positioning the undercarriage and sizing the wheels and tires. These fundamentals are shown schematically in the three-view aircraft drawings. Relevant information on wheel tires is also presented in this chapter. The undercarriage is a complex and heavy item and, therefore, expensive to manufacture. It should be made right the first time.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.012

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAircraft DesignSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207