MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324498002 · doi:10.2514/6.2013-647

Full Configuration Low Boom Model and Grids for 2014 Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop

2013· article· en· W2324498002 on OpenAlex
John Morgenstern

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

Venue51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsBoomSonic boomComputer scienceAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A conceptual supersonic transport design, identified as 1021-01, was developed for the NASA N+2 Supersonic Validations program. It was designed to produce very low sonic boom. A wind tunnel model was fabricated and tested to validate the predicted low sonic boom. An efficient “spatial averaging” measurement technique was used to handle distortions endemic to low sonic boom wind tunnel measurement, resulting in measurements precise enough to match predicted ground loudness within 1 PLdB. It was decided this model and data would make a good case for the 2014 Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop. Model development details and flow prediction challenges encountered during development are illustrated. Test oil flow visualization is shown to guide analyses, especially with regard to viscous boundary layer modeling. Viscosity was not important at fullscale but was found to be important at wind tunnel model scale (1/125). Geometry and grid files are expected to be available on the workshop website by 31 January 2013.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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