MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2356764420

Discussion of the Armed Helicopter Anchoret Performance Validating Test Colligation Flight Subject and Means Setup

2014· article· en· W2356764420 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

VenueHelicopter Technique · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Detection Methods
Canadian institutionsBell Helicopter Textron (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)EngineeringSubject (documents)AeronauticsRadarAutomotive engineeringAerospace engineeringComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Usually for the armed helicopter,designed advisement anchoret performance such as radar anchoret,infrared anchoret,laser anchoret,visible light anchoret or collection multi- anchoret. By the way of validating anchoret performance of the helicopter,for amelioration design and use offers gist,the text with radar anchoret,infrared anchoret,laser anchoret,visible light anchoret during test intercalates fly subject and method made a few expounding,for fling test engineering technology personnel and pilots reference.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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