New Adaptive Algorithm Development for Monitoring Aircraft Performance and Improving Flight Management System Predictions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To compute the most efficient route that the aircraft has to fly, the flight management system (FMS) needs a mathematical representation of the aircraft performance. However, after several years of operation, various factors can degrade the overall performance of the aircraft. Such degradation can affect the reliability of the aircraft model, and the crew would lose confidence in the fuel planning estimated by the FMS. This paper presents the results of a study in which a new adaptive algorithm is proposed for continuously updating the FMS performance model using cruise flight data. The proposed algorithm combines aircraft performance monitoring techniques with adaptive lookup tables to model the aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft. The methodology was applied to the well-known Cessna Citation X business aircraft, for which a research aircraft flight simulator was available. The development of this methodology was accomplished by creating an initial performance model, adapting it using flight data in cruise, and finally comparing its prediction with a series of flight data collected with the flight simulator. Results have shown that the proposed methodology was able to reduce fuel flow prediction mean errors by about 5%, whereas the standard deviation was reduced by a factor of 3.4.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".