MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2019787209 · doi:10.1029/2004sw000133

International workshop on new standard radiation belt and plasma models

2005· article· en· W2019787209 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueSpace Weather · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueSpace Exploration and Technology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAerospaceSpacecraftSpace (punctuation)AeronauticsSpace radiationSpace explorationAgency (philosophy)Systems engineeringSpace environmentSpace suitAerospace engineeringSpace ShuttleInternational Space StationEngineeringComputer sciencePhysicsAstronomy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Space systems are designed to function in and withstand harsh radiation belt and plasma environments that are defined primarily with the use of the decades-old AP-8 and AE-8 models. These models are esteemed for their extensive spatial coverage and user friendliness, but contain inaccuracies due in part to the limitations of the data-collecting instruments available at the time, as well as to extrapolations in time, space, and energy spectra that were required to cover measurement gaps when they were initially developed. As a result of these inaccuracies, mission designers tend to overestimate the expected operational radiation environment, leading to costly overdesign of space systems. To begin rebuilding the infrastructure required to develop new space radiation belt and plasma models, the Working Group Meeting on New Standard Radiation Belt and Space Plasma Models for Spacecraft Engineering, sponsored by NASA's Living With a Star (LWS) program, met on 5–8 October, 2004 in Adelphi, Maryland. Such new models will facilitate smarter space system design and assure the safety of astronauts. The workshop was chaired by Janet Barth at NASA and was planned by a steering committee composed of Barth, Bern Blake from the Aerospace Corporation, Don Brautigam of the Air Force Research Laboratory, and Eamonn Daly from the European Space Agency. Over the course of the workshop, the international community of space environment modelers worked together with industry and agencies to identify the current status of modeling efforts and data availability and the needs of the end users. More than 50 people participated in the workshop, which led to drafting preliminary road maps for creating a new standard radiation environment model. There is a significant amount of post-AP-8/AE-8 data and subsequent modeling that has not been fully utilized due in part to a lack of a formal process to peer review data set calibration and new models. Data quality and calibration are key to model formation. Reiner Friedel, a workshop member from the Los Alamos National Laboratory, described the calibration process as “having to build the road before we can build a car.” Given that the development of a new standard model is an international effort, the consensus of the workshop was that the Committee on Space Research/Panel on Standard Radiation Belts should play a central role in managing the standardization of data sets and models. The workshop members then started a dialogue on future models that would include the differing motivations of the engineering and scientific communities. Those who would use the models stressed a need for fine temporal resolution of average and worst-case energy fluxes, and greater precision of model estimates for the 1000 km to geosynchronous altitude environment as being among the most critical requirements for cost reduction and improved performance of space system designs. To begin to address these needs, the attendees devised plans for interim models based on orbit regions and considered the necessary steps to achieve the goal of one unified model. Two such interim models were deemed ready for standardization: POLE, a model of geostationary orbit electrons produced jointly by the French National Aerospace Research Establishment and Los Alamos National Laboratory, and an inner-belt proton model produced by SAIC and the Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy. These interim models provide improved temporal resolution and accuracy over AP-8/AE-8 for their respective regions as well as some statistical information. Planned future missions that will begin to address the shortcoming of data in the regions of space between low-Earth and geostationary orbits were also presented at the workshop. These missions include NASA's LWS Geospace Missions and the proposed Canadian Space Agency's Outer Radiation Belt Injection, Transport Acceleration and Loss Satellite (ORBITALS). ORBITALS will provide much-needed data in the slot region between the inner and outer radiation belts, while both missions will expand the equatorial coverage of data sets. The workshop thus pulled together the current space environment prediction capabilities and data sets, identifying the improvements since the development of the industry-standard AP-8 and AE-8 models, and presented future data sources. The attendees used this information to draft road maps and committed themselves to working together to obtain the resources and broader community support to reach their goal of developing replacement models. Jean-Marie Lauenstein is an electrical engineer with Muñiz Engineering, Inc., at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,611
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,332

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,228
Écart entre enseignants0,214 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle