MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293378824 · doi:10.4271/2003-01-2954

Flexible Automated Riveting and Assembly of Fuselage Skin Panels

2003· article· en· W2293378824 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

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilGovernment of the United Kingdom
KeywordsRivetFuselageComputer scienceEngineeringManufacturing engineeringAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper describes the current state of development of a highly flexible assembly and auto-riveting system based around multiple robots and compact and innovative riveting and assembly end-effectors. The riveting end-effectors are capable of drilling, countersinking, sealing and upsetting operations. The assembly end-effectors are re-configurable and can handle ant stringer or frame on a Bombardier Aerospace CRJ700 fuselage panel. The cell is also equipped with non-contact metrology systems that are used to compensate for compliance and remove the requirement for large and complex fixtures. The riveting system has been fully evaluated and a number of test coupons submitted for testing. Detailed analysis of these has proved that the resulting riveted joints are of production quality. The final system will be non-product specific allowing a single cell to produce a number of different aircraft components.</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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
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