MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999615319

Data-driven classification of CH-146 manoeuvres using MEMS-IMU sensor system

2017· article· en· W6999615319 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Navigation and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInertial measurement unitGlobal Positioning SystemSampling (signal processing)Sensor fusionData setClassifier (UML)Inertial navigation system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the use of a low-cost standalone MEMS-IMU (micro-electromechanical system - inertial measurement unit) sensor system developed by the National Research Council Canada (NRC) for manoeuvre recognition in helicopters. The system records accelerations, angular rotation rates, magnetic flux, altitude, location and velocity through its IMU and GPS. The MEMS-IMU system was flown on the Bell 412 CH-146 Griffon helicopter in a series of scripted flights consisting of 60 manoeuvres and regimes from the helicopter's usage spectrum. A flight log recorded by passengers with detailed start and stop times and identification of the manoeuvres during flight was key information in the development of manoeuvre recognition models. Statistical tests to analyze the data diversity between each flight showed significant variability of the parameters from flight to flight. Because of this variability and because there was significant imbalance in the distribution of data for the individual manoeuvres, a pooled stratified sampling scheme was used to construct a representative training set for developing data-driven models. Different subsets of the MEMSIMU measurements were explored to exclude GPS and/or magnetometer readings. Even with the different subsets, the classifier results using stratified sampling show that very high overall classification accuracy can be obtained using the measurements from the standalone MEMS-IMU sensor 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicMaritime Navigation and SafetyFrench-language works237,207