MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239126870 · doi:10.31224/osf.io/ehrdj

Original Title: On value and using of TAWS/FMS alert data in examination of air accidents, the case of Warsaw-Smolensk flight on 10 April 2010. Polish Title: O wartosci i wykorzystaniu danych TAWS/FMS do badania wypadkow lotniczych, sprawa lotu Warszawa-Smolensk, 10 kwietnia 2010 roku

2019· preprint· en· W4239126870 on OpenAlexaff
Andrzej Ziółkowski, Marek Skłodowski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTransportation Systems and Safety
Canadian institutionsInternational Civil Aviation Organization
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewCockpitAeronauticsFlight management systemService (business)Computer scienceFlight simulatorOperations researchSimulationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through an analysis of TAWS/FMS data collected and registered during the last minute of TU-154M aircraft flight from Warsaw to Smolensk, we show the value and existence of space for undertaking research works on enhancing standard functionality of TAWS/FMS systems to enable their effective use in examination of the course and causes of air accidents. The flight ended up in the total destruction of the aircraft and the death of all passengers and crew on board. The TAWS/FMS flight altitudes and spatio-temporal data, i.e. geographical location and speed of the aircraft motion, were inspected for their internal and external consistency with the data from the ATM QAR service recorder. Using the data from ATM QAR, records from the cockpit voice recorder (CVR), jointly with data from the TAWS/FMS systems, it was possible to reconstruct the most probable horizontal and vertical trajectory of the TU- 154M aircraft during the last minute of flight before its complete destruction, as well as the likely scenario of accompanying events. The data available from recorders enabled the authors to gain information on the preliminary stage of the course of accident, and the first phase of the aircraft’s destruction, resulting in serious damage of the left wing of the aircraft. Enhanced standard functionality of TAWS/FMS systems, incorporating use of their data in the post-accident situations examination, would have improved results and simplified the present analysis considerably.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation Systems and SafetyFrench-language works237,207