MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimized gauging for tire–rim loading identification

2020· article· en· W3115758680 on OpenAlexaff
Kévin Cosseron, David Mellé, Jean-Frédéric Diebold, François Hild, Stéphane Roux

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Mechanics - A/Solids · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
FundersAssociation Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Instrumentation (computer programming)Process (computing)Eigenvalues and eigenvectorsStrain gaugeComputer scienceInverseKey (lock)Task (project management)Fisher informationEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematicsSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The determination of the tire–rim interface loadings is a difficult but key task for the aircraft wheel designer to predict the wheel service life. In conjunction with an optimal parameterization of these loadings previously defined by the authors, the optimal sensor placement problem is considered to identify the loading parameters at best. An optimization procedure of the wheel instrumentation, which consists of several strain gauges , is thus proposed to minimize the uncertainties of the sought parameters during the identification process. Two criteria are reviewed, namely, the determinant and the lowest eigenvalue of the Fisher information matrix , and different optimization procedures are assessed. The effectiveness of the method is proven considering the identification of an inflation case. The optimized instrumentations lead to drastically reduced uncertainties of the loading parameters and thus ensure reliable inverse identifications.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Mechanics - A/SolidsSame topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207