Identification and Validation of the Cessna Citation X Longitudinal Aerodynamic Coefficients in Stall Conditions using Multi-Layer Perceptrons and Recurrent Neural Networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increased number of accidents in general aviation due to loss of aircraft control has necessitated the development of accurate aerodynamic airplane models. These models should indicate the linear variations of aerodynamic coefficients in steady flight and the highly nonlinear variations of the aerodynamic coefficients due to stall and post-stall conditions. This paper presents a detailed methodology to model the lift, drag, and pitching moment aerodynamic coefficients in the stall regime, using Neural Networks (NN). A system identification technique was used to develop aerodynamic coefficients models from flight data. These data were gathered from a level-D Research Aircraft Flight Simulator (RAFS) that was used to execute the stall maneuvers. Multilayer Perceptrons and Recurrent Neural Networks were used to learn from flight data and find correlations between aerodynamic coefficients and flight parameters. This methodology is employed in here to optimize neural network structures and find ideal hyperparameters: training algorithms and activation functions used to learn the data. The developed stall aerodynamic models were successfully validated by comparing the lift, drag, and pitching moment aerodynamic coefficients predicted for given pilot inputs with experimental data obtained from the Cessna Citation X RAFS for the same pilot inputs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it