MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233030828 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645238

Design and development of the Hyperloop Deployable wheel system

2021· preprint· en· W4233030828 on OpenAlexafffund
Graeme P.A. Klim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLevitationAutomotive engineeringMode (computer interface)Development (topology)Space (punctuation)AeronauticsBearing (navigation)EngineeringMechanical engineeringTransport engineeringAerospace engineeringComputer scienceMagnetOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2013 Elon Musk inspired engineers and entrepreneurs with his idea for a 5th mode of transportation: the Hyperloop. Using large near-vacuum tubes as a medium, Musk envisioned sending humans and cargo in levitating pods from Los Angeles to San Francisco California in 35 minutes or less. Consisting of multiple subsystems, these pods would use magnetic or air-bearing technology for primary levitation to accommodate speeds approaching 700 mph. To address Musk’s call for a traditional deployable wheel system to provide added safety and low-speed mobility for the pods, a patent-pending Hyperloop Deployable Wheel System (HDWS) was developed. This report details the author’s contribution to the design and development of the award-winning HDWS and examines the constraints and limitations imposed by the Hyperloop concept: small operational space, near-vacuum low-pressure conditions, high-speed use and smooth ride requirements.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpacecraft and Cryogenic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207