Preliminary-Design Aerodynamic Model for Complex Configurations Using Lifting-Line Coupling Algorithm
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
A modern nonlinear-lifting-line-theory algorithm allowing the prediction of aerodynamic coefficients and lifting-surface-pressure distribution for multiple aircraft configurations is presented. The algorithm is applied to isolated wing, high-lift systems (slat/main/flap), and multisurface configurations, with emphasis on the treatment of high-lift geometry representations. The fuselage is not geometrically modeled, but its influence is appropriately taken into account for the aerodynamic-coefficient evaluation. The results show good agreements with wind-tunnel and/or high-fidelity numerical data for the prediction of the maximum lift coefficient and the poststall behavior in subsonic and transonic conditions. The use of sectional airfoil data obtained via solutions of the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations with infinite-swept-wing assumptions—so-called 2.5-dimensional model—is shown to greatly improve the results over traditional two-dimensional solutions.
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