Designing and Optimizing Missiles in an Interactive Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Designing missiles is a highly multidisciplinary engineering task. Involved in the design is geometric modeling, aerodynamics, propulsion, thermal analysis, weight estimation, trajectory analysis, lethality, structural analysis, controls analysis, packaging of components, and cost estimation. In the past these disciplines have been separated making it difficult to agree on a design that will satisfy the needs of each of the disciplines. Interactive Missile Design (IMD) is a somftware integrating the disciplinary tools involved in the conceptual design of missiles. With IMD, the designer can concentrate on improving the design instead of spending time on ensuring continuity between the disciplines. IMD will enable better missile designs and also reduce the design cycle time. IMD is built in an object-oriented dependency-tracking webenabled language called AML (Adaptive Modeling Language). With the integration of the disciplinary software optimization has become a natural extension of the capabilities of IMD. This paper will discuss the development of the interactive missile design environment, the optimization functionality integrated with it, as well as a missile optimization example. © 2002 by M. Alexandra Ahlqvist.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".