MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576053140

Self-Driving Aircraft Towing Vehicles: A Preliminary Report

2015· article· en· W2576053140 on OpenAlexaff
Mai Lee Chang, Ronald D. Archer, E. Vincent Cross, Shelby Thompson, Jerry L. Franke, Robert Christopher Garrett, Waqar Malik, Kerry McGuire, Garrett Hemann

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTowingRunwayCrewWorkloadEngineeringAeronauticsWork (physics)Computer scienceSimulationAutomotive engineeringMarine engineeringTransport engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce an application of self-driving vehicle technology to the problem of towing aircraft at busy airports from gate to runway and runway to gate. Autonomous towing can be supervised by human ramp- or ATC controllers, pilots, or ground crew. The controllers provide route information to the tugs, assisted by an automated route planning system. The planning system and tower and ground controllers work in conjunction with the tugs to make tactical decisions during operations to ensure safe and effective taxiing in a highly dynamic environment. We argue here for the potential for significantly reducing fuel emissions, fuel costs, and community noise, while addressing the added complexity of air terminal operations by increasing efficiency and reducing human workload. This paper describes work-in-progress for developing concepts and capabilities for autonomous engines-off taxiing using towing vehicles.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207