MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100926693

National Defence Headquarters

2012· article· en· W7100926693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaintainabilityAircraft maintenanceOrder (exchange)Planned maintenanceMaintenance actionsDecision support system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Availability is a system performance parameter which provides insight into the probability that an item or system will be available to be committed to a specified requirement. Depending on the application, availability can be defined to include reliability, maintainability and logistic support information. For fleet management purposes, the ability to quantify availability in terms of all of its contributing elements is essential. This paper provides a discussion on a steady state operational availability model which can be used to assist the Canadian Air Force in its aircraft fleet management requirements. The availability model embodies scheduled and unscheduled maintenance and allows for impact analysis using in-service maintenance data. The model is sensitive to fleet size, aircraft flying rate, frequency of downing events, aircraft maintainability, scheduled inspection frequency, and scheduled inspection duration. The predictive capability of this availability model is currently providing the Canadian Air Force with a more sophisticated maintenance analysis decision support capability. In order for this paper to be available for general distribution, it must be unclassified. As a result, the case studies presented do not reveal the actual operational availability of any Canadian Air Force fleet. However, the level of detail provided is more than adequate to illustrate the case studies and give insight into

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207