MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380143052 · doi:10.4236/cn.2023.152004

A Meta-Learning Approach for Aircraft Trajectory Prediction

2023· article· en· W4380143052 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

VenueCommunications and Network · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTrajectoryAviationMean squared errorAviation safetyAviation accidentAir traffic managementRandom forestAir traffic controlData pre-processingData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceStatisticsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aviation industry has seen significant advancements in safety procedures over the past few decades, resulting in a steady decline in aviation deaths worldwide. However, the safety standards in General Aviation (GA) are still lower compared to those in commercial aviation. With the anticipated growth in air travel, there is an imminent need to improve operational safety in GA. One way to improve aircraft and operational safety is through trajectory prediction. Trajectory prediction plays a key role in optimizing air traffic control and improving overall flight safety. This paper proposes a meta-learning approach to predict short- to mid-term trajectories of aircraft using historical real flight data collected from multiple GA aircraft. The proposed solution brings together multiple models to improve prediction accuracy. In this paper, we are combining two models, Random Forest Regression (RFR) and Long Short-term Memory (LSTM), using k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN), to output the final prediction based on the combined output of the individual models. This approach gives our model an edge over single-model predictions. We present the results of our meta-learner and evaluate its performance against individual models using the Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Absolute Altitude Error (AAE), and Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) evaluation metrics. The proposed methodology for aircraft trajectory forecasting is discussed in detail, accompanied by a literature review and an overview of the data preprocessing techniques used. The results demonstrate that the proposed meta-learner outperforms individual models in terms of accuracy, providing a more robust and proactive approach to improve operational safety in GA.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.184 · 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