MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405420564 · doi:10.1017/aer.2024.126

Small aircraft flight trajectory optimisation using a multidisciplinary approach

2024· article· en· W4405420564 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Rostami, Julian Bardin, Daniel Neufeld, Joon Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Aeronautical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryMultidisciplinary approachAeronauticsAerospace engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a competitive market, airlines continually seek solutions that can reduce their operational costs. Flight path optimisation is a commonly pursued approach to this but requires a large amount of data about the flight environment including the weather information, the aircraft performance and the air traffic control (ATC) requirements. Existing programmes require the user to provide this aircraft performance data in advance and are incapable of generating the information on their own. In this study, using a multidisciplinary approach and numerical optimisations, a novel standalone flight path optimiser (SAFPO) solution is proposed and developed to choose the best flight path for a flight between two points in accordance with the cost objectives. SAFPO uses its own performance calculator, predefined ATC routes, and known weather information to find the optimum flight path which minimises fuel consumption and/or flight time. The aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft are determined using a validated semi-empirical programme called MAPLA, previously developed for light aircraft analysis. Furthermore, the optimisation process consists of a multidisciplinary-feasible (MDF) framework that employs a genetic algorithm (GA) optimiser. The resulting performance characteristics of the aircraft and the optimisation process are compared with the actual information provided within the flight manual of a Beechcraft Baron G58 aircraft. The optimisation results show that SAFPO can be used to make advances in the daily operations of small and local airlines suffering from a lack of aircraft performance data and help them to choose the scenario that best accomplishes their cost objectives.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Aeronautical JournalSame topicAdvanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207