Integrated uncertainty techniques in aircraft derivative design optimization.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aircraft manufacturing companies have to consider multiple derivatives to satisfy various market requirements. They modify or extend an existing aircraft to meet the new market demands while keeping the development time and the cost to a minimum. Many researchers have studied the derivative design process, but these research considered the baseline and the derivatives together, while using the whole set of design variables. Therefore, an efficient process that can reduce the cost and the time for the aircraft derivative design is needed. In this dissertation, Aircraft Derivative Design Optimization process (ADDOPT) was developed which obtains the global changes from the local changes in the aircraft design to develop the aircraft derivatives efficiently. The sensitivity analysis was implemented to ignore design variables that have low impact on the objective function. This avoids wasting computational effort and time on low priority variables for design requirements and objectives. Additionally, the classification of uncertainty from its characteristics and sources of uncertainty involved in the aircraft design process were suggested to consider with design optimization. Uncertainty from the fidelity of analysis tools was applied in design optimization to increase the probability of optimization results. To handle uncertainty in low fidelity analysis tools on aircraft conceptual design optimization, Reliability Based Design Optimization (RBDO) and Possibility Based Design Optimization (PBDO) methods were performed. In this research, Extended Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Test (eFAST) method was implemented in ADDOPT for Global Sensitivity Analysis (GSA) method and Collaborative Optimization (CO) based framework with RBDO and PBDO were also used. These methods were evaluated using numerical examples. ADDOPT was carried through on the civil jet aircraft derivative design. The objective of the optimization problem was to increase cruise range while satisfying the requirement such as the number of passengers. The proposed process reduced computation effort by reducing the number of design variables and achieved the target probability of failure when considering uncertainty from low fidelity analysis tools.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".