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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes a study carried out on a CAE gcueing system. A g-seat is generally regarded as an economical and practical solution to motion cueing for highly maneuverable aircraft such as military fighter trainers. An inherent difficulty in building a g-seat is to maintain the mechanical profile of the cueing seat close to that in the actual aircraft. This constraint limits the travel of actuators and hence the amount of cueing that can be provided to a pilot. The set up and tuning of a gcueing system is also typically time-consuming. This study proposes a way to optimize the use of available actuator travel for g-cueing; it discusses the goals of g-seat tuning and proposes a strategy to optimize the process and produce an appropriate cueing setting for flight training. The study considers different tunings for pilot training in a level-seven flight training device fitted with an eight-channel visual system. The results from the study show the proposed methods are useful for the tuning of a g-cueing system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it