MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Landing of Tilt-rotor Aircraft after Engine Failure Considering Pilot Inherent Limitations

2022· article· en· W4317383802 on OpenAlexaff
Xufei Yan, Renliang Chen, Shiqiang Zhu, Anhuan Xie, Jason Gu

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrustTakeoff and landingControl theory (sociology)AerodynamicsTakeoffRotor (electric)Nonlinear systemFlight control surfacesOptimal controlTilt (camera)Landing gearComputer scienceEngineeringAerospace engineeringMathematicsControl (management)Structural engineeringMechanical engineeringMathematical optimizationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An augmented longitudinal rigid-body model is developed with a set of algebra equations describing the controls in the cockpit and the differential equations describing the pilot inherent limitations. The landing procedure after one engine failure is formulated into a nonlinear optimal control problem. XV-15 tilt-rotor aircraft is taken as the sample for the demonstration of landing in one engine failure during short takeoff. The results show that the total power required, thrust coefficient, longitudinal flapping angle and optimal controls are more relatively gentle than the solutions without considering the pilot inherent limitations. Compared with the basic longitudinal rigid-body model, the optimal solutions involve more control information.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO)Same topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207