Estimation for Runway Friction Coefficient Based on Multi-Sensor Information Fusion and Model Correlation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Friction is a crucial factor affecting air accident occurrence on landing or taking off. Tire-runway friction directly contributes to aircraft stability on land. Therefore, an accurate friction estimation is a rising issue for all stakeholders. This paper summarizes the existing measurement methods, and a multi-sensor information fusion scheme is proposed to estimate the friction coefficient between the tire and the runway. Acoustic sensors, optical sensors, tread sensors, and other physical sensors form a sensor system that is used to measure friction-related parameters and fuse them through a neural network. So far, many attempts have been made to link the ground friction coefficient with the aircraft braking friction coefficient. The models that have been developed include the International Runway Friction Index (IRFI), Canada Runway Friction Index (CRFI), and other fitting models. Additionally, this paper attempts to correlate the output of the neural network (estimated friction coefficient) with the correlation model to predict the friction coefficient between the tire and the runway when the aircraft brakes. The sensor system proposed in this paper can be regarded as a mobile weather-runway-tire system, which can estimate the friction coefficient by integrating the runway surface conditions and the tire conditions, and fully consider their common effects. The role of the correlation model is to convert the ground friction coefficient to the grade of the aircraft braking friction coefficient and the information is finally reported to the pilots so that they can make better decisions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".