Manpads Modeling And Simulation For Rotorcraft Structures Survivability
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shoulder-launched Man Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS) missiles are fast becoming the weapon of choice for ground personnel against aircraft. Highly effective, economical, and widely proliferated worldwide, these weapons pose a serious threat to rotorcraft, which typically conduct operations that place them in harms way of MANPADS during all mission phases. In recent conflicts, data collected involving MANPADS and aircraft suggests that a hit does not necessarily equate to a kill. In addition, innovative structural design concepts may improve the chances of rotorcraft to survive MANPADS encounters, particularly for larger airframes. This paper will describe the methodology currently under development at Bell Helicopter to provide physics-based modeling and simulation of aircraft structural response to MANPADS and HEI projectile detonations. The paper will discuss how the technology will be used as a design tool to increase understanding of the damage mechanisms, and how results may be used to develop new, more survivable structural concepts in a costeffective manner.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it