MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495089800 · doi:10.4050/jahs.60.011006

Design and Development of the <i>Atlas</i> Human-Powered Helicopter

2015· article· en· W2495089800 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cameron D. Robertson, Todd M. Reichert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Helicopter Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsAirframeAerodynamicsAerospace engineeringAeronauticsEngineeringRotor (electric)WingAtlas (anatomy)Flight testComputer scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AeroVelo initiated the Atlas Human-Powered Helicopter Project in August 2011 to win the AHS Sikorsky Prize, which despite prior attempts had remained unclaimed for over 30 years. The Sikorsky Prize required a human-powered helicopter to sustain flight for 60 s, momentarily reach a height of 3 m, and maintain position within a 10 m × 10 m area. A configuration study was undertaken using low-fidelity aerodynamic analysis and estimated mass figures. An aerostructural optimization framework was developed for rotor design, including a novel vortex-ring aerodynamic model with included ground effect prediction, finite-element analysis including integrated composite failure analysis, and a detailed weight estimation scheme. The airframe was composed of a wire-braced truss structure, and innovative designs were developed for many of the aircraft's lightweight-focused subsystems. After initial flight testing in August 2012, experimental optimization and performance improvement led to a second testing program beginning in January 2013. Testing in 2013 led to a reduction in required power, improved understanding of structural dynamics, and control strategy. The project culminated with the successful AHS Sikorsky Prize flight on June 13, 2013.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Helicopter SocietySame topicAerospace Engineering and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207