MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2728459918 · doi:10.4050/f-0073-2017-12151

Engine Inlet Performance Analysis for the V-280 Demonstrator

2017· article· en· W2728459918 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRocket and propulsion systems research
Canadian institutionsBell Helicopter Textron (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInletComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engine inlet performance for the V-280 Air Vehicle Concept Demonstrator (AVCD) was evaluated for several different flight conditions including cruise, hover, and conversion mode. The analysis shows that the design provides sufficient pressure recovery while keeping the inlet's total pressure distortion within acceptable limits defined by the engine manufacturer, General Electric (GE). This paper discusses the tools and analytical methodologies used to perform the analysis. The approach allowed the V-280 AVCD design team to move forward with confidence that the engine would achieve performance margins to meet the program's flight test objectives.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRocket and propulsion systems researchFrench-language works237,207