MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790625987 · doi:10.2514/1.i010565

Toward Smarter Autoflight Control System Infrastructure

2018· article· en· W2790625987 on OpenAlexaff
Stephan G. Heinemann, Hausi Müller, Afzal Suleman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerospace Information Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlight planAviationAir traffic controlControl (management)Plan (archaeology)Systems engineeringComputer scienceThe InternetHuman-in-the-loopEngineeringReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet of Flying Things and related emerging technologies, such as the System-Wide Information Management Infrastructure of the Federal Aviation Administration NextGen program, present numerous opportunities for the aviation sector. The ubiquity of aeronautical, flight, weather, aerodrome, and maintenance data accelerates the development of smarter software systems to cope with the ever-increasing requirements of the industry sector. We describe the evolving infrastructure of our Smart Autoflight Control System as a self-adaptive autonomic system. The Smart Autoflight Control System shall monitor, analyze, plan, and execute airborne missions continuously. Decision making and support regarding computed flight trajectories is going to involve the interaction with human actors in the loop. Our system shall ultimately assess and improve its own performance in computing trajectories employing a continuous selection and tuning of planning environments and applicable algorithms.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aerospace Information SystemsSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207