MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382052305 · doi:10.4050/f-0079-2023-18119

Integrated Reality In-flight Simulation (IRIS): The Developmental Challenges

2023· article· en· W4382052305 on OpenAlexaffabout
Perry Comeau, Alanna Wall, Kris Ellis, Arthur Gubbels

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace and Aviation Technology
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityFlight simulatorAeronauticsSimulationHeadsetFlight testEngineeringComputer scienceAerospace engineeringSystems engineeringHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Research Council Canada (NRC) and Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) have developed modelling and simulation tools intended to de-risk, increase efficiency and standardize Ship Helicopter Operating Limitations (SHOL) testing through the use of modelling and simulation. The Integrated Reality In-Flight Simulation (IRIS) tool is a novel simulator platform where an evaluation pilot (EP) flies a variable stability aircraft while wearing a virtual reality (VR) headset with many elements of the shipboard environment carefully reproduced including the injection of real time turbulence models established from wind tunnel trials. The turbulence and other environmental effects on the aircraft motion are coupled directly into the aircraft in real time, thereby retaining accurate critical proprioceptive and vestibular cueing for the pilot. NRC has recently completed flight test evaluations of the prototype concept. Pilot comments from initial testing indicated that the system required little adaptation, presented no noticeable lag, no attributable propensity to cause motion sickness, and that the turbulence felt realistic. The testing indicated that typical VR deficiencies such as resolution and field of view are not as impactful during close-in shipboard operations, making this application very effective.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFrench-language works237,207