MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116973783 · doi:10.2514/1.c038496

Experimental Test Campaign for Stall Characterization on a Generic Variable Sweep Wing

2025· article· en· W7116973783 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Moens, Quentin Gallas, Sylvain Mouton, Frédéric Ternoy, Éric Laurendeau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aircraft · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStall (fluid mechanics)AerodynamicsWingAngle of attackWind tunnelSwept wingComputational fluid dynamicsControl theory (sociology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aircraft wing stall is a highly complex phenomenon as several mechanisms interact depending on global and local flow characteristics. Recent developments in numerical methods and aerodynamic modeling make possible the vision of an accurate prediction of stall in the near future. In order to reach this objective, there is a need for a high-quality experimental database for validation, including surface and flowfield measurements. To that purpose, a generic test model was specifically designed and built to provide force balance metrics as well as steady and unsteady pressure signals. In particular, the model takes into account forward, backward, and zero sweep angles while adding high-lift devices in order to modify the stall mechanism on the wing. The model was then tested at the ONERA-F2 wind tunnel, and experimental results validate the model’s intended stall characteristics and provide the needed flow data for future numerical validations. This paper describes the different design choices, the measurement techniques considered for this test campaign, and the first results obtained validating the stall processes expected for the different designed configurations.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AircraftSame topicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsFrench-language works237,207