MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412412098 · doi:10.4050/jahs.70.042001

A Comparison of Low‐ and High‐Fidelity Models for Tail Rotor Icing Phenomena

2025· article· en· W4412412098 on OpenAlexaff
Aishwerya Singh Gahlot, Jeewoong Kim, Lakshmi Sankar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Helicopter Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIcingRotor (electric)Environmental scienceAerospace engineeringFidelityComputer scienceAeronauticsPhysicsMeteorologyEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A low-fidelity model for modeling ice accretion phenomena over two-bladed teetering rotors has been developed. In this approach, the blades are assumed to be rigid, and the flapping motion is caused by the inertial, centrifugal, and aerodynamic forces acting on the blade section. The aerodynamic forces are computed using a table look-up of precomputed airfoil lift and drag coefficients as a function of effective angle of attack. Following the analysis of the rotor without icing effects, ice shapes at selected radial locations on the rotor are computed. The impact of ice shapes on the two-dimensional (2D) lift and drag characteristics is estimated using a 2D computational fluid dynamics analysis. Finally, the rotor is reanalyzed using the low-fidelity model with the iced airfoil lift and drag characteristics. Comparisons with test data and a higher fidelity model are also presented.

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)0.000
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Helicopter SocietySame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207