MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402670923 · doi:10.4050/f-0080-2024-1049

Flight Trajectory Tracking for Training Simulator Qualification Using Model Predictive Control Strategy: A Case Study

2024· article· en· W4402670923 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceTracking (education)Flight simulatorTraining (meteorology)SimulationModel predictive controlControl (management)Artificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A high-fidelity flight simulator is used to effectively train and evaluate pilots. The simulator must, however, be previously qualified by authorities by comparing the responses of the simulator to those of flight tests for several maneuvers. The use of a controller is permitted to make corrections to the simulator input signals. The simulator inputs and outputs must, however, be within tolerance bands defined by the authorities, compared to flight test data. This article presents a model predictive controller (MPC) and its evaluation on a takeoff and landing case. The method is already promising because these results were obtained after very few tuning iterations, which could result in significant time and cost savings. This is made possible by the clear meaning of the impact of the MPC tuning parameters on the simulator inputs and outputs and also by the ability to intrinsically consider the interactions and constraints of the multivariable system.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.234 · 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