MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331784305 · doi:10.2514/6.2007-1916

Airfoil Generation and Optimization using Multiresolution B-Spline Control with Geometrical Constraints

2007· article· en· W2331784305 on OpenAlexaff
N. Giammichele, Jean‐Yves Trépanier, Christophe Tribes

Bibliographic record

Venue48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirfoilSpline (mechanical)Computer scienceB-splineMathematicsEngineeringAerospace engineeringStructural engineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a scheme that combines multiresolution curve editing with linear constraints: thickness and camber. This framework allows to perform multiresolution manipulation of piecewise polynomial B-spline curves, while specifying and satisfying various constraints on the curves. An easy computable multiresolution curve editing technique is investigated for the purpose of airfoil design as a novel tool for the generation and optimization of 2D wing profile. Thickness and camber constraints imposed at several sections of the profile are incorporated into this freeform curve generating environment, as it will be shown. The aimed objective was the improvement of an aerodynamic module included into a complete wing generator designed for multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) purposes. The behavior of the profile generator under multiresolution decomposition while applying thickness and camber constraints will be presented, as well as some geometric and aerodynamic optimization test cases involving large changes in shape. A noteworthy aspect of this technique is the possibility of using a variable number of parameters in the optimization process from low to high, and the smoothness of the profile shape obtained.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials ConferenceSame topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207