MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317634099 · doi:10.2514/6.2023-2191

Modeling the Longitudinal Dynamics of the Cessna Citation X using Neural Network Methodology

2023· article· en· W4317634099 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

VenueAIAA SCITECH 2023 Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkAvionicsFlight simulatorComputer scienceAviationSimulationAccelerationAerospace engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2023-2191.vid This paper presents a methodology developed at the Laboratory of Applied Research in Active Controls, Avionics and AeroServoElasticity (LARCASE) to model the linearized longitudinal dynamics of the Cessna Citation X business jet using artificial neural networks. For this purpose, a simulation platform developed at LARCASE was used to generate the aircraft longitudinal state space matrices {A, B} for a wide range of operating conditions. This simulation platform was developed and validated from data obtained from a Level D Research Aircraft Flight Simulator (RAFS) designed and manufactured by CAE Inc. According to the Federal Administration Aviation (FAA, AC 120-40B), the level D is the highest certification level for the flight dynamics of an aircraft. The data collected from the simulation platform was then restructured into a comprehensive database for the neural network training process. In this study, the structure of the neural network was determined by performing several analyses in order to find the optimal number of layers and neurons, as well as the combination of activation and learning functions, that provide the best prediction results. The validation of the neural network model was performed in two steps. First, analysis was performed by comparing the longitudinal matrix {A, B} predicted by the neural network with the matrix obtained from the simulation platform. Then, a second analysis was performed by comparing the aircraft dynamics parameters (pitch angle, normal acceleration and time variations) for two modes - the short period and the phugoid obtained using neural network versus the simulation platform. The results showed that the proposed model provides very accurate predictions of longitudinal dynamics.

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 score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.224 · 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