MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323960303 · doi:10.2514/6.2014-2274

Numerical optimization of the S4 Éhecatl UAS airfoil using a morphing wing approach

2014· article· en· W2323960303 on OpenAlex
Antoine Simon, Andreea Koreanschi, Ruxandra Mihaela Botez

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

Venue32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphingAirfoilWingComputer scienceAerospace engineeringAerodynamicsAeronauticsComputer graphics (images)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we describe the new methodology and the results obtained for multiple flight conditions optimization of the airfoil of the S4 unmanned aerial system, using a morphing wing approach. The goal of reducing the airfoil drag coefficient over a broad range of speeds and angles of attack has been achieved using an in-house optimization tool based on the relatively new Artificial Bee Colony algorithm, coupled with the Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno algorithm to provide a final refinement of the solution. The obtained results were validated with an advanced, multi-objective, commercially available optimizing tool. The aerodynamic calculations were performed using a 2D linear panel method, coupled with an incompressible boundary layer model and a transition estimation criterion, to provide accurate estimations of the airfoil drag coefficient. For very small displacements of the airfoil surface, less than 2.5 mm, drag reductions of up to 14% have been achieved for a wide range of different flight conditions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.172 · 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