A Study on the Criteria for Applying the Obstacle Limitation Surface of the UAM Vertiport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, UAM (Urban Air Mobility) has emerged as a solution to these urbanization problems, and many related reports and diverse prospects have been reported. UAM flights are planned to take off and land at a Vertiport located in the city center and fly along a pre-established corridor. In order for UAM to operate safely in the city center, it must ensure a safe flight path that avoids the buildings in the city center and many surrounding obstacles. Therefore, in this study, we compared and examined the installation standards of the obstacle limitation surface necessary for UAM to take off and land safely at the Vertiport. First, we analyzed the helicopter obstacle limitation surfaces in Japan and overseas, and the UAM Vertiport installation standards and obstacle limitation surface application standards recently announced at the FAA and EASA. It identified differences and similarities between heliport and Vertiport, and considered improvements to domestic helicopter obstacle limitation surfaces and criteria that could meet FAA and EASA standards.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".