MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325674833 · doi:10.2514/6.2008-1965

Comparison of the Tumbling Behavior and Pressure Evolution of Several API Projectiles in a Hydrodynamic Ram Environment

2008· article· en· W2325674833 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Antonio González González, Chad E. Sparks, Christopher Kubes, William Girard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Defense Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsBell Helicopter Textron (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProjectileComputer scienceAstrobiologyMechanicsAerospace engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will present the experimental results from a series of hydrodynamic ram characterization ballistic tests as conducted under the Survivable Affordable Repairable Airframe Program (SARAP) Virtual Prototype and Validation program. The purpose of these tests was to understand and quantify the relationship between the tumbling behavior and pressure evolution of the 12.7mm API, 14.5mm API, and 23mm API projectile in a hydrodynamic ram environment. The design of the experiment revolved around the ability to track the projectile’s trajectory and orientation through the fluid in three-dimensional space using high-speed video images. Conclusions drawn will include a comparison between each of the projectiles with respect to both trajectory behavior and pressure time history evolution.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMilitary Defense Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207