Development of a Machine-Learned Cruise Guide Indicator for Rotorcraft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a machine-learned virtual cruise guide indicator (vCGI) for Chinook helicopters. Two temporal neural networks were trained and evaluated on measured data from 55 flight tests, one for the fore rotor and another for the aft rotor, to predict a vCGI value, which protects 23 components from fatigue damage during steady-state conditions. Three different classes of machine learning architectures were evaluated for prediction of the vCGI from time sequences: a temporal convolutional neural network with 1D dilated causal convolutions, a long short-term memory recurrent neural network, and an attention-based transformer architecture. The final average model accuracy on unseen flight data is currently greater than 93% for CGI values which could result in fatigue damage and 90% for normal operation CGI values. Model accuracy was improved through a series of advancements in: (1) selection of optimal training data using temporal collective variables and unsupervised learning, (2) dataset augmentation with maximum-entropy temporal collective variables, and (3) implementation of a mixture-of-experts classification-regression approach using an adversarial classification approach to assign maneuver labels. The results are presented for each advancement in model development along with lessons learned in training machine learning models on real-world, time-dependent rotorcraft data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".