MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238193259 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14665293

Development and Evaluation of Cueing Symbology for Rotorcraft Operations in Degraded Visual Environment (DVE)

2021· preprint· en· W4238193259 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vamshi Chittaluri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSimulationAircrewWorkloadCrewTask (project management)Real-time computingAeronauticsEngineeringSystems engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Degraded Visual Environment (DVE) is experienced when helicopters enter Inadvertent Instrument Meteorological Conditions (I-IMC). DVE can occur in the form of fog, night flight occurring naturally or when pilots try to land in unprepared (dusty, snowy) landing zones causing brownouts and whiteouts from rotor downwash. The Degraded Visual Environment Navigation Support (DVENS) project aimed to use a LiDAR to scan a specified Field of View (FOV) and range to identify a zone to be safe or unsafe for landing in a simulation capacity. A Head Down Display (HDD) with touch capabilities was used to provide Virtual Visual Meteorological Conditions (V-VMC), in which 3D conformal, 2D orthographic symbology is displayed. For the iterative design of the symbology, to diagnose and minimize pilot error in DVE the Taxonomic Framework for Aircrew Error evaluation is used. The framework allowed for a more direct design approach with clear objectives based on operational requirements and presenting an optimal workload for pilots. Maintaining the objective of showing the required information to the pilots while minimizing clutter is imperative as too much information can increase workload. Thus, the aircrew error Taxonomic framework helps identify the design goals required to neutralize pilot error leading to an efficient design. The Ryerson Mixed Immersive Motion Simulation (MIMS) lab’s Fixed Base Simulator (FBS) and CAE, Presagis’s HELI CRAFT were used as the simulation testing tools. Non-intrusive questionnaires such as NASA Task Load Index (TLX), Bedford and Cooper-Harper display rating scales were used to provide feedback and evaluate the display system. Multiple scales were used for validation of results and to measure the workload, stress, physical, psychological and time loads. This methodology and design were found to be extremely helpful in assisting pilots to land, take off in DVE and IIMC conditions.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207