MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327415880 · doi:10.2514/6.2012-2597

Prototype Unmanned System Training Simulator

2012· article· en· W2327415880 on OpenAlexaff
Conrad G. Bills, Randall Wallace, Nicholas Klimas

Bibliographic record

VenueInfotech@Aerospace 2012 · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityCertificationComputer scienceSimulationSystems engineeringTraining systemTraining (meteorology)Embedded systemSoftware engineeringEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a prototype training simulator design developed in response to the expanding student population for unmanned system operators. The projected operators for unmanned systems are now being expanded beyond the traditional focus-group of pilot and pilot trainees. The broadening of the field from which unmanned system operators previously had been selected, and the increased mission support role of operators, also broadens the ground training requirements in order to achieve certification. The backbone of the simulator for this training system is a scalable architecture concept that is softwareintensive with loosely coupled training system elements. This common backbone for scalable application also results in common logistic support, meaning lower life cycle cost. The prototype training device design takes advantage of commercially off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware and software products already proven in fielded platforms. The training system design that responds to these requirements incorporates principles from device-based aircrew training as well as high engagement strategies from simulation and gaming. This design not only enhances unmanned system operator training, but also makes significant advancement of role player in-the-loop mission training.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfotech@Aerospace 2012Same topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207