MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7007798228

Aircraft wireless networks for safety-critical systems

2020· dissertation· en· W7007798228 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvionicsReliability (semiconductor)WirelessInter-Access Point ProtocolNetwork packetWireless networkPacket loss
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wireless avionics intra communication (WAIC) connects avionics integrated on board a single aircraft in a closed exclusive wireless network in lieu of heavy and expensive wired deployments.Recently, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) approved the frequency band 4.2-4.4GHz for WAIC which promises weight savings and cost reductions.However, wireless avionics must meet extremely high reliability requirements for flight certification by safety aviation authorities.Current industrial wireless networks, which are based on IEEE 802.15.4 and IEEE 802.11 standards, have been proposed as potential solutions for safety-critical systems.A promising candidate is IEEE 802.15.4e which uses Time-Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) to provide reliable packet transmission.We performed experiments consisting of IEEE 802.11 and IEEE 802.15.4e and utilized a recently published mathematical model to evaluate their failure probability with respect to loss of packets.Our results indicated that the allowed packet loss probability for IEEE 802.11 is between 0.045 and 0.35 for safety-critical systems to meet the DO-178C reliability standard.Furthermore, the IEEE 802.15.4e with TSCH protocol respects the DO-178C reliability standard with a failure probability of 10 -5 per hour but failed the DO-160G standard due to electromagnetic interference.my thesis thoroughly, and for his valuable recommendations.To my RSSL peers, thank you to Alex, Derek, and Shabbir.We had some very interesting discussions late evenings and during weekends.I'm glad to have spent time together during my research journey.To my Montreal colleagues, I would like to thank Stphane and Yannick

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · 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