MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035536883 · doi:10.2514/6.2020-2691

Novel Parameters for the Performance Evaluations of Leading Edge Tubercles on Airfoils

2020· article· en· W3035536883 on OpenAlexaff
Satpreet S. Sidhu, Ruben E. Perez, W. Allan, Asad Asghar

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUM · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirfoilEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers have tested tubercles with different amplitude and wavelength combina- tions on a range of low-speed airfoils. However, a systematic approach has never been used for the optimization of tubercles. In this study, tubercles are optimized using an articial neural network known as Self-Organizing Maps (SOM). Data were extracted using reverse engineering from published tubercle research and used for training the SOM. A new vari- able, a Reynolds number based on hydraulic diameter ReDh, is introduced for the tubercle classification directly relating performance. In addition, post-stall operability another new parameter was introduced for tubercle performance assessment. Based on the SOM re- sults, new tubercle geometries were selected for 2 new proof of concept tests to perform further investigation. Stall angle improved due to the reduction of amplitude, wavelength and ReDh, validating the predictions of SOM. However, the one tubercle geometry resulted in lower lift curve slope in the pre-stall region and a reduced CLmax in comparison to the baseline, possibly a result of drastic reduction in tubercle wavelength. In the post-stall regions, the new tubercle geometry showed improvements over the baseline unmodified airfoil.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUMSame topicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsFrench-language works237,207