Identification and Validation of an Engine Performance Database Model for the Flight Management System
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Paper presents the validation studies results of an engine mathematical performance model identification for flight management system trajectory prediction and optimization applications. The methodology was applied to the Cessna Citation X business aircraft, for which the aircraft flight manual and the flight crew operating manual are available. In addition, another data source based on computerized trajectory was also used to generate several climb and descent flight profiles required in the engine model identification process. To demonstrate and further validate the accuracy of the proposed engine performance model, a level-D research aircraft flight simulator of the Cessna Citation X was used as a reference. According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA, AC 120-40B), level D corresponds to the highest qualification level for the flight dynamics and engine modeling. Validation of the methodology was accomplished by comparing the prediction model with a series of flight data collected with the flight simulator for different flight conditions and different flight phases including takeoff, climb, cruise, and idle descent. Comparison results were validated with a tolerance of for each engine performance predicted by the model in terms of fan speed, core speed, thrust, and fuel flow.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it