MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transfer Learning for Hypersonic Vehicle Trajectory Prediction

2023· article· en· W4376606508 on OpenAlexaff
Emily R. Bartusiak, Michael A. Jacobs, Corbin Fraser Spells, Moses W. Chan, Mary L. Comer, Edward J. Delp

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersLockheed Martin
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceTransfer of learningArtificial intelligenceHypersonic speedMachine learningAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs) introduce challenges in terms of predicting their future flight behavior because they fly at high speeds and maneuver during flight. Furthermore, there are limited examples of actual HGV flights, which impedes the development of prediction methods that model HGV trajectories. In this paper, we investigate transfer learning for HGV trajectory prediction to evaluate how stochastic grammars trained on a limited number of HGV trajectories perform on new, unseen HGV trajectories. Our analysis includes two datasets containing HGV trajectories that exhibit different maneuvers. One dataset contains trajectories that exhibit vertical maneuvers, which are behaviors related to changes in altitude. The second dataset exhibits both horizontal and vertical maneuvers, where horizontal maneuvers refer to changes in crossrange and downrange. The vertical dataset is also significantly smaller than the second dataset (i.e., the dataset that exhibits horizontal and vertical maneuvers). We develop a prediction method using the smaller, less complicated dataset to model HGV trajectories. Specifically, we use an unsupervised machine learning method based on stochastic grammars. Then, we demonstrate that the learned model can be used to predict HGV behavior and engageability for trajectories from the larger, more complicated dataset. Our results show that transfer learning improves prediction performance (even on unseen trajectory maneuvers) and can be used in limited data scenarios.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207