MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325122603 · doi:10.2514/6.2014-1467

Quarter Cycle Modulation of a Minimally Actuated Biomimetic Vehicle

2014· article· en· W2325122603 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

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsGeneral Dynamics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)WingAerodynamicsMicro air vehicleDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Aerodynamic forceEngineeringControl systemMotion controlFlappingPhysicsComputer scienceStructural engineeringControl (management)Aerospace engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a technique, called quarter cycle constant-period frequency modulation, to control the motion of wings on a flapping wing micro air vehicle. This technique allows control over the wingbeat period and three additional points within a single wingbeat cycle, allowing modulation of the wing’s velocity to provide control over multiple degrees-of-freedom of the vehicle. Using a blade element based aerodynamic model, both instantaneous and cycle averaged forces and moments are analytically computed for a specific type of wing beat motion that enables nearly decoupled, multiple degrees-of-freedom control of the aircraft. The wing positions are controlled using oscillators whose frequencies change once per wing beat cycle. A control oriented dynamic model of the vehicle is derived, which is based on a cycle averaged representation of the forces and moments. Control derivatives are calculated and a cycle-averaged control law is designed that provides control over multiple degrees-of-freedom of the vehicle.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · 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