MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132442261

Missile propulsion performance modeling in a visual simulation environment

2001· article· en· W7132442261 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Lauzon, R.A. Stowe, R. Lestage, A.E.H.J. Mayer, W. Halswijk, J.L.P.A. Moerel

Bibliographic record

VenueTNO Repository · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMissilePropulsionComponent (thermodynamics)Weapon systemRocket (weapon)FidelityPropellantHigh fidelityModeling and simulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Defence Research Establishment Valcartier (DREV) in Canada and the TNO Prins Maurits Laboratory (TNO-PML) in the Netherlands are investigating ducted rocket propulsion technology and its impact on missile performance in a collaborative research program. One key component of this collaboration is the development of a Modeling and Simulation (M&S) capability to evaluate the applicability, benefits and limitations of the ducted rocket for air-to-air missiles in realistic mission engagement scenarios. Since the engagement simulation is used specifically to assess the impact of missile propulsion on overall weapon performance, the selection of the components of the missile model and their level of fidelity have been purposely tailored to focus on those performance drivers having a dependence on the propulsion system.The engagement model includes a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) representation of the missile flight dynamics as well as component models of suitable fidelity for the seeker, guidance and autopilot. The core component of the missile model is the standalone Fortran-based TNO DREV ducted rocket engine model. The complete engagement model including the launcher aircraft, missile and target, was implemented in Matlab/Simulink to take advantage of the wide range of features available. Visual environments provide an integrated capability for fast prototyping of dynamic systems, facilitate team development through a standard approach for model implementation, and offer a flexible mechanism for the re-use of legacy models. Sample results of simulated missile-target engagements illustrate the application of this simulation capability to missile propulsion trade-off studies and analysis of system concepts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTNO RepositorySame topicGuidance and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207