JOINT WINTER RUNWAY FRICTION MEASUREMENT PROGRAM (JWRFMP): INTERNATIONAL RUNWAY FRICTION INDEX (IRFI) VERSUS AIRCRAFT BRAKING COEFFICIENT (MU)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a Joint Winter Runway Friction Measurement Program (JWRFMP) report on aircraft and ground friction measuring device (GFMD) research and data collection as related to the capability of a runway surface to provide aircraft wheel-braking action during winter operations. project was led by Transport Canada and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, with support from National Research Council Canada, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, the Norwegian Air Traffic and Airport Management (now Avinor), France's Direction gnrale de l'aviation civile, and organizations and equipment manufacturers from Austria, Canada, France, Germany, Norway, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. data was used to compare the International Runway Friction (IRFI) of the GFMDs with the Aircraft Braking Coefficient (Mu). During the year 2000, ASTM E 2100 standard The International Runway Friction Index was issued. use of IRFI reduced the standard error in measured friction of GFMDs from as high as 0.2 (without IRFI) to an average under 0.05. IRFI correlations to the aircraft reduced the variations of the slopes of the correlations by 50 percent as compared to GFMDs without IRFI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".