MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7010640627

An integrated approach to the conceptual development of aircraft structures focusig on manufacturing simulation and cost

2005· article· en· W7010640627 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Portal (Queen's University Belfast) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopment (topology)Component (thermodynamics)Key (lock)Conceptual designConceptual modelComputer-integrated manufacturingField (mathematics)Process (computing)Advanced manufacturing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an increasingly competitive market place manufacturers in the aerospace industry need to improve the efficiency of their product development methods. With fewer new aircraft being developed, innovation needs to switch from product to process technologies such as design, development and manufacturing planning in order to improve efficiency and reduce cost. This paper describes a product development methodology based on automatically generated CAD data which can be used for the structural analyses of and manufacturing planning for, aircraft fuselage sections. The introduction of manufacturability into the design arena makes concurrent engineering design, manufacturing planning and process validation possible before committing to the costly activities of making prototypes and tooling. Network analyses carried out on simulated assembly operations for a regional jet fuselage section, shows that labour utilization can be significantly improved when compared to a real assembly process with a 19% improvement in financial efficiency. The simulation predicts that these results can be achieved with a single final assembly jig. As two jigs are currently used for this assembly operation in reality this result represents a significant financial saving.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Portal (Queen's University Belfast)Same topicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207