Volume 04 Issue 02
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a novel tri-rotor configuration is proposed with the goal of granting vertical take-off and landing capabilities to a future concept of tiltrotor, fixed-wing, aircraft while minimizing the overall mass of the propulsive system and the amount of aerodynamic drag developed during horizontal flight.The novelty of the presented configuration is related not only to the thrust vectoring capabilities of all three rotors but also to the constraints surrounding the action of the rear rotor, which will be required to provide thrust during both vertical and horizontal flight stages while drawing power from an internal combustion engine fixed inside the aircraft's fuselage.Another distinctive feature of the proposed configuration is related to the 20/80 thrust distribution which exists between the front and rear rotors respectively in vertical flight, unlike the more conventional approach of having all three rotors evenly loaded.The proposed rotorcraft configuration was then translated into a test vehicle which was subjected to several stages of ground and flight testing, with the ultimate goal of evaluating the airworthiness of this multi-rotor configuration as a concept.This process also encompasses the development of a custom flight control firmware in PX4, required to operate not only this vehicle but also any other multi-rotor or Vertical Take-Off and Landing system with such configuration.Finally, a frequency-response based system identification technique is applied to the collected flight data as to obtain a suitable flight dynamics model for future autopilot tuning Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Vertical Take-Off and Landing Tilt-rotor Tri-rotor System Identification
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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".