MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Time Prediction of Key Links in Flight Ground Support Under Missing Data

2025· article· zh· W7107971252 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAir Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMissing dataGraphKey (lock)Time seriesBenchmark (surveying)Basis (linear algebra)Bayesian networkBaseline (sea)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate flight ground service time prediction can improve the flight transit efficiency and realize flight refinement management. However, the lack and abnormality of relevant data make the research more challenging in real scenarios. To this end, a flight ground service time prediction model considering missing values is proposed. A dynamic time warping(DTW) algorithm is introduced on the basis of the causal graph convolutional network (CGCN) to realize the prediction of flight ground service link time under different data missing modes and missing rates. The flight support dataset (6 480 items) of a large airport in China is used as an example for validation. The results show that the proposed model can maintain high prediction performance under conditions of 20%—80% missing rates, compared with the remaining seven benchmark models including causal graph convolutional network with missing data (CGCNM), dynamic spatial⁃temporal graph convolution network (DSTGCN), Bayesian temporal matrix factorization (BTMF), long short⁃term memory (LSTM), etc. The mean absolute error (MAE) of the prediction results for each service time node is reduced by more than 8.1%, and the root‑mean‑square error (RMSE) is reduced by more than 4.6%. The experiment demonstrates that the proposed model is better than the baseline model in terms of prediction accuracy and prediction stability. It can provide an objective and reliable decision-making basis for flight support operations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207