MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468686131 · doi:10.1017/s0001924000000713

Acoustic validation of a new code using particle wake aerodynamics and geometrically-exact beam structural dynamics

2005· article· en· W2468686131 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

VenueThe Aeronautical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensUniversity of Michigan
KeywordsAeroelasticityAerodynamicsWakeStructural engineeringBeam (structure)Component (thermodynamics)Aerodynamic forceAeroacousticsAcousticsEngineeringPhysicsComputer scienceAerospace engineeringSound pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the validation of a new code for prediction both aeroacoustic and aeroelastic behaviour of hingeless rotors. The structural component is based on a non-linear beam element model considering small strains and finite rotations, which uses a mixed variational intrinsic formulation. The aerodynamic component is built on a loworder panel method incorporating a vortex particle free-wake model. The aerodynamic and structural components are combined to form a closely coupled aeroelastic code that solves in the time-domain. The loading and thickness noise terms for the aeroacoustic calculations are calculated from the aerodynamic data using a formulation based on the Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings (FW-H) equation. The code is successfully validated for acoustic signature and BVI predictions using test cases from the HELINOISE program.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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