MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of an Adaptive Aero-Propulsive Performance Model in Cruise Flight – Application to the Cessna Citation X

2022· article· en· W4311185923 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueINCAS BULLETIN · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirframeCruiseAerodynamicsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkAirplaneLookup tableFlight simulatorPropulsive efficiencyFuel efficiencySimulationAerospace engineeringEngineeringThrustArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To accurately predict the amount of fuel needed by an aircraft for a given flight, a performance model must account for engine and airframe degradation. This paper presents a methodology to identify an aero-propulsive model to predict the fuel flow of an aircraft in cruise, while considering initial modeling uncertainties and performance variation over time due to degradation. Starting from performance data obtained from a Research Aircraft Flight Simulator, an initial aero-propulsive model was identified using different estimation methods. The estimation methods studied in this paper were polynomial interpolation, thin-plate splines, and neural networks. The aero-propulsive model was then structured using two lookup tables: one lookup table reflecting the aerodynamic performance, and another table reflecting the propulsive performance. Subsequently, an adaptative technique was developed to locally and then globally, adapt the lookup tables defining the aero-propulsive model using flight data. The methodology was applied to the Cessna Citation X business jet aircraft, for which a highly qualified level D research aircraft flight simulator was available. The results demonstrated that by using the proposed aero-propulsive performance model, it was possible to predict the aerodynamic performance with an average relative error of 0.99%, and the propulsive performance with an average relative error of 3.38%. These results were obtained using the neural network estimation method.

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 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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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