MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2731415721 · doi:10.4050/f-0073-2017-12077

Joint Military and Commercial Rotorcraft Mechanical Diagnostics Gap Analysis

2017· article· en· W2731415721 on OpenAlexaff
D. I. Wade, Brian J. Tucker, Mark Davis, D. E. Knapp, Sophie Hasbroucq

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering and Test Systems
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National Defence
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)AeronauticsAerospace engineeringEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A group of rotorcraft original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and military and commercial operators have come together to review the current state of mechanical diagnostics (MD) for on board rotorcraft Health and Usage Monitoring Systems (HUMS). HUMS has become an integral part of the modern rotorcraft both in commercial and military operations to enhance safety and enable Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM). Commercial oil and gas operators depend on the HUMS vibration monitoring and MD to comply with regulations and customer requirements for ensured safety of off-shore transportation. Under the auspices of the HUMS Technical Committee within the American Helicopter Society (AHS), the authors have assessed the performance of HUMS MD through both quantitative and qualitative means. First, results from the U.S. Army fleet, which comprises thousands of deployed HUMS on multiple aircraft models, were examined. Second, qualitative surveys of both commercial/military operators and rotorcraft/HUMS original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) were completed. Finally, a literature survey focused on HUMS research and development (R&D) and operational analysis was conducted. Based on this assessment, gaps in the performance of current HUMS MD, needs for future R&D, and challenges to closing those gaps are identified. Collaborative, pre-competitive efforts are also recommended to help close the gaps and generally raise the performance of HUMS MD to enable further enhancements to safety and to support expanded CBM initiatives.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering and Test SystemsFrench-language works237,207