MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741646979 · doi:10.4050/f-0070-2014-9602

V-22 and the Future of Carrier Onboard Delivery (COD): Improving the Way the Navy Re-Supplies Its Carriers and Maritime Forces

2014· article· en· W2741646979 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Roby, J J Barber, Ken Karika

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDefense, Military, and Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsBell Helicopter Textron (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNavyMarine engineeringBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Carrier onboard delivery (COD) mission involves the use of aircraft to ferry personnel, mail, supplies, VIPs, and high-priority cargo, such as replacement parts from shore bases to aircraft carriers. Several types of aircraft, including helicopters, have been used by navies in the COD role. Helicopters in the USN fleet have also played a major role in re-supply with the Vertical Onboard Delivery, or VOD mission element. The COD/VOD combined mission has heretofore amounted to a maritime hub-and-spoke system whereby the COD aircraft deploy the major re-supply cache to a carrier (hub), followed by distribution of supplies and personnel (spoke) to other carriers and ships using helicopters in the VOD role. The Navy is currently considering options for future COD platforms as the Greyhounds approach the end of their current service life supporting the carriers. This paper discusses the potential for improvements in cost and time executing the Navy’s carrier re-supply using the V-22 Osprey in the COD and COD/VOD combined re-supply roles.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDefense, Military, and Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207