Optimization and design of an aircraft’s morphing wing-tip demonstrator for drag reduction at low speed, Part I – Aerodynamic optimization using genetic, bee colony and gradient descent algorithms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, an ‘in-house’ genetic algorithm is described and applied to an optimization problem for improving the aerodynamic performances of an aircraft wing tip through upper surface morphing. The algorithm’s performances were studied from the convergence point of view, in accordance with design conditions. The algorithm was compared to two other optimization methods, namely the artificial bee colony and a gradient method, for two optimization objectives, and the results of the optimizations with each of the three methods were plotted on response surfaces obtained with the Monte Carlo method, to show that they were situated in the global optimum region. The optimization results for 16 wind tunnel test cases and 2 objective functions were presented. The 16 cases used for the optimizations were included in the experimental test plan for the morphing wing-tip demonstrator, and the results obtained using the displacements given by the optimizations were evaluated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it