Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Low-level windshear is among the most hazardous weather on approach, and the reactive alerting chain fixed by certification standards such as TSO-C117 is the last line of defense. This paper asks whether the fixed five-second decision window of the certified F-factor criterion leaves a systematic false-alarm space in compact-microburst encounters, and whether a criterion based on physical consequence can suppress this space without modifying certified behavior; the question is examined on a Boeing 747-400 approach-phase simulation platform, with the TSO-C117 alerting chain reproduced in the loop as the certification baseline. Replaying the standard’s six reference window lengths (5–10 s) shows that false-alarm suppression and hazard detection trade off along the window axis, and none of the tested windows satisfies both. A three-channel short-window (0.5 s) neural detector with force-residual auxiliary tasks from Newton’s second law therefore runs in parallel with the untouched certified chain and arbitrates the alert level. On 14,825 Monte Carlo scenarios, the false-alarm-zone alert rate drops from the 99.2% certification baseline to 8.0%, with residual triggers concentrated near the upper edge of the divergence band, while at the classifier level (a complementarity analysis, not a deployed behavior) the union of the two criteria misses none of the 6888 genuinely hazardous scenarios; re-adjudication under four third-party consequence criteria confirms the suppressed scenarios are benign. With zero real data in training, the detector covers 68.4% of 329 GPWS windshear alert events in real-flight QAR records, responding a median 14.5 s before the alert trigger. The physical-consequence criterion extends the classical predictive/reactive complementarity into the reactive layer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: