MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2526098184 · doi:10.4236/ojapps.2016.610064

First Flight from Europe to the South Atlantic

2016· article· en· W2526098184 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
André Silva, Jorge Barata, C. M. Passos Morgado, Fernando P. Neves

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Applied Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAviation History and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsAeronauticsGeodesyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The History of the transatlantic flights goes back to 1919 and began with a flight performed from Newfoundland to Lisbon; two weeks later another flight was performed between Newfoundland and Ireland. On 1922, the Portuguese airmen Gago Coutinho and Sacadura Cabral crossed the South Atlantic Ocean by air in a flight performed exclusively with internal means of navigation: a new instrument that consisted in a type of sextant improved with two spirit levels to provide an artificial horizon and also with the help of a “path corrector”. Despite this journey had lasted 79 days to cross South Atlantic Ocean, their flight time was only 62:26 minutes, and they’ve flown 8,383 nautical miles, using 3 different hydroplanes christened: Lusitania, Pátria and Santa Cruz. Despite this journey had lasted 79 days, their flight time was only 62 h 26 m; they’ve flown 8,383 nautical miles using 3 different hydroplanes christened: Lusitania, Pátria and Santa Cruz. The new artificial horizon sextant had proven itself while flying over the ocean, without external references.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.005

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of Applied SciencesSame topicAviation History and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207