MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392727657 · doi:10.2514/1.i011250

Electric Motor Chain Modeling Using Artificial Neural Networks and Semi-Empirical Methods

2024· article· en· W4392727657 on OpenAlexafffund
Marine Segui, Ruxandra Mihaela Botez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerospace Information Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPropellerThrustTorqueRotational speedBattery (electricity)Electric motorArtificial neural networkMATLABComputer scienceEngineeringAutomotive engineeringPower (physics)Control theory (sociology)SimulationMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMarine engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The methodology presented in this paper is dedicated to a user who wants to design a power chain of an electric unmanned aerial vehicle. The power chain includes a brushless direct current (BLDC) motor, a propeller, and a battery. Three models are presented to predict the thrust, electrical consumption, mechanical torque, and rotational speed provided by each component of an electrical power chain. Only public data were used to design these models. The research was developed in order to be used by all people who want to buy electrical power chain components and therefore to model their properties. Neural networks set with MATLAB parameters were used to design BLDC motor output (rotational speed and mechanical torque) models. Empirical methods such as blade element theory (BET) and disk area were used to model propeller thrust. A battery discharge model was designed based on public datasheets. Very good prediction results were obtained for the rotational speed (0.20% of error) and torque (0.45% of error). Small thrust modeling errors of 1.06% were found with the BET method. Models presented in this research could be designed using a wide type of data, such as public data (provided on manufacturer websites) or real test bench measurements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aerospace Information SystemsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207