MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331274811 · doi:10.2514/6.2014-3018

Climb, Cruise and Descent 3D Trajectory Optimization Algorithm for a Flight Management System

2014· article· en· W2331274811 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsClimbCruiseDescent (aeronautics)TrajectoryComputer scienceTrajectory optimizationAlgorithmAeronauticsAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global warming is one of the major issues in the Earth today. Many studies are intended to reduce aircraft’s fuel consumption to minimize aviation’s footprint. This article presents the combination between two different trajectories’ optimization types: one optimizing the vertical navigation profile, and the other optimizing the lateral navigation profile. The aircraft model is obtained from a performance database, which offers an improved precision over aircraft modeled trough equations of motion, constantly used on the literature. The calculation of the optimal trajectory is obtained by implementing dynamic weather information. The VNAV algorithm calculates the optimal altitudes, speeds and step climbs to reduce fuel consumption, while the LNAV algorithm searches for alternative horizontal trajectories. The aircraft takes advantage of tail winds and avoids head winds. The results were compared with real flight information, and the fuel burn reduction obtained is encouraging.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

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 head0.172
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207