MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187951807 · doi:10.2514/6.2021-3077

Connecting Model-based Systems Engineering and Multidisciplinary Design Analysis and Optimization for Aircraft Systems Architecting

2021· article· en· W3187951807 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA AVIATION 2021 FORUM · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSystems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsortium de Recherche et d’innovation en Aérospatiale au Québec
KeywordsSystems engineeringComputer scienceWorkflowProcess (computing)AerospaceSystems Modeling LanguageSoftware engineeringMultidisciplinary approachConceptual designSystems designUnified Modeling LanguageEngineering design processSystems architectureArchitectureEngineeringAerospace engineeringSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2021-3077.vid The aerospace industry has set ambitious targets to meet environmental goals while under pressure to develop novel and optimized aircraft configurations effectively. Multidisciplinary Design Analysis and Optimization (MDAO) are increasingly used to optimize aircraft and their systems. Model-Based System Engineering (MBSE) methods show the potential to make the design process more effective, integrate new disciplines, and capture complex certification constraints. Today, MBSE and MDAO are not connected; different methods and tools are used, not harvesting the full potential of both approaches. This paper discusses the need for improved system architecting in the aircraft conceptual design process and introduces a framework to use MBSE in connection to MDAO. In this framework, the MBSE environment compiles system information within a system architecture specification, acting as the backbone and visual support for each stage in the systems architecting process. MDAO is used for the evaluation of system architectures. This paper presents a case study as part of the EU-funded AGILE4.0, in which the specific link between model specification in the MBSE tool Capella and a system-level MDAO workflow is explored. Overall, this paper presents a practical contribution to linking MBSE and MDAO and paves the way for better integration of MBSE into the aircraft design process, thereby enabling MBSE implementation from conceptual design onwards. Furthermore, this will enable more detailed system analysis, such as safety analysis, starting in conceptual design, based on architecture models.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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