MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7093350240 · doi:10.4224/40003795

General electric CF34-10 icing certification test plan 2002/2003 project implementation plan

2002· article· en· W7093350240 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationDeliverableIcingTest (biology)Scope (computer science)Plan (archaeology)Work (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Research Council Canada (NRC) has entered into a contract to perform, with the support of General Electric Aircraft Engines (GEAE), icing certification tests on a General Electric CF34-10 gas turbine. The tests will be conducted in an icing certification facility located in test cell No. 4 of building M-7 within the Structures, Materials and Propulsion Laboratory of the Institute for Aerospace Research. This project, will commence on December 1, 2002 and end on March 31, 2003. The total estimated cost to perform the project is approximately $1.6 million USD as per NRC’s proposal of June 16, 2002 based on a 50 hour icing test program. This project implementation plan (PIP) is a NRC/IAR internal document and was created for the purposes of facilitating the execution of the project. This document defines the scope statement, Work Breakdown Structure, monitor/control procedures, and reporting procedures to be followed throughout the project life cycle. The primary aim of this project is to perform icing certification tests to meet the test requirements outlined in the GEAE Statement of Work issued June 27, 2002. NRC will conduct the tests with assistance from GEAE. It is anticipated that the test matrix outlined in a prliminary CF34-10 Far 33.68 Icing Test Matrix can be completed within the four month time frame. The deliverables of this project will include those outlined in the GEAE Statement of Work. This section provides details on project organization, reporting structure, and detailed objectives of the major tasks.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207