MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493833218 · doi:10.1017/s0001924000008459

New altitude optimisation algorithm for the flight management system CMA-9000 improvement on the A310 and L-1011 aircraft

2013· article· en· W2493833218 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 · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPhilips (Canada)École de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsElectronicsTrajectoryFlight simulatorSoftwareAerospace engineeringAlgorithmAltitude (triangle)Computer scienceSimulationEngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The current flight management system (FMS), CMA-9000, from CMC Electronics-Esterline, only optimises the vertical flight profile in terms of the speed of the aircraft. This article defines a methodology that optimises the speeds and altitudes for the vertical profile, obtaining a trajectory that reduces the global flight cost. The performance database (PDB) provided by CMC Electronics-Esterline is presently used on aircraft such as the Lockheed L-1011, the Airbus A310 and the Sukhoi Superjet 100 Russian regional jet. The PDB is used as the reference to design different trajectory optimisation algorithms to obtain the altitude where the aircraft fuel efficiency is the best. These algorithms are compared with the part-task trainer (PTT), simulator that represents the FMS CMA-9000, supplied by CMC Electronics-Esterline as well. To validate the results, the FlightSIM® software is used, which considers a complete aircraft aerodynamic model for its simulations, giving accurate results and very close to reality.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.182 · 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