MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2571372758 · doi:10.1016/j.cja.2016.12.018

Optimization and design of an aircraft's morphing wing-tip demonstrator for drag reduction at low speeds, Part II - Experimental validation using Infra-Red transition measurement from Wind Tunnel tests

2017· article· en· W2571372758 on OpenAlexafffund
Andreea Koreanschi, Oliviu Şugar Gabor, Joran Acotto, Guillaume Brianchon, Gregoire Portier, Ruxandra Mihaela Botez, Mahmoud Mamou, Youssef Mébarki

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Aeronautics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAileronWingMorphingAirfoilWind tunnelAerodynamicsAngle of attackAerospace engineeringEngineeringLift coefficientGenetic algorithmDragReduction (mathematics)Swept wingSimulationStructural engineeringComputer scienceMechanicsTurbulencePhysicsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present paper, an ‘in-house’ genetic algorithm was numerically and experimentally validated. The genetic algorithm was applied to an optimization problem for improving the aerodynamic performances of an aircraft wing tip through upper surface morphing. The optimization was performed for 16 flight cases expressed in terms of various combinations of speeds, angles of attack and aileron deflections. The displacements resulted from the optimization were used during the wind tunnel tests of the wing tip demonstrator for the actuators control to change the upper surface shape of the wing. The results of the optimization of the flow behavior for the airfoil morphing upper-surface problem were validated with wind tunnel experimental transition results obtained with infra-red Thermography on the wing-tip demonstrator. The validation proved that the 2D numerical optimization using the ‘in-house’ genetic algorithm was an appropriate tool in improving various aspects of a wing’s aerodynamic performances.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations58
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of AeronauticsSame topicAeroelasticity and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207