MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172732923 · doi:10.1109/tte.2021.3089605

Review of Electric Machines in More-/Hybrid-/Turbo-Electric Aircraft

2021· article· en· W3172732923 on OpenAlexafffund
Ehab Sayed, Mohamed Abdalmagid, Giorgio Pietrini, Nicole-Marie Sa'adeh, Alan Dorneles Callegaro, Cyrille Goldstein, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUpgradeAutomotive engineeringElectrificationPropulsionTurbofanElectrically powered spacecraft propulsionElectric motorTakeoffElectric machineControllabilityAerospaceBattery electric vehicleEngineeringComputer scienceBattery (electricity)Aerospace engineeringElectricityMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aircraft electrification is currently the best alternative to address the rising demand for more air transportation and deal with anticipated economic and environmental impacts. Although the all-electric-aircraft (AEA) concept is not yet a feasible solution, the more-electric aircraft (MEA) is gaining significant attention. Electrical systems either partially or entirely replace the large and inefficient hydraulic, pneumatic, and mechanical conventional aircraft actuating systems. The upgrade could also encompass the propulsion system, as in hybrid- and turbo-electric aircraft. This upgrade reduces the aircraft weight, reduces the usage of pollutant fluids, increases fuel efficiency, reduces carbon emissions, and increases aircraft controllability and reliability. This article reviews various application areas of electric machines in electrified aircraft, such as actuation, taxiing, propulsion, and generation. Moreover, it reviews the main types of currently/to be utilized electric machines and the critically required specifications. Finally, a comparison between the different considered machines and potential future research is discussed.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations313
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicAdvanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207