MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W145860308

An Affordable, Low-Risk Approach to Launching Research Spacecraft as Tertiary Payloads

2003· article· en· W145860308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Freddy Pranajaya, Robert Zee, Per Lundahl Thomsen, Mogens Blanke, Rafał Wiśniewski, Lewis Franklin, Jordi Puig‐Suari

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Design and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpacecraftAeronauticsAerospaceNegotiationSpacecraft designLow earth orbitAerospace engineeringSpace researchEngineeringComputer scienceSystems engineeringSatellitePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid and affordable access to space for university researchers and educators has always been a challenge. Despite the availability of lower-cost (e.g. Russian) launch vehicles, launching payloads 20 kg or less typically involves a certain minimum cost that necessitates a cost sharing arrangement among numerous parties and the handling of complex export control issues. In turn, this complicates mission scheduling and increases the risk of missing launch deadlines. The University of Toronto Institute for Aerospace Studies, Space Flight Laboratory (UTIAS/SFL) has taken a leading role in addressing this challenge, and has successfully led a group of international spacecraft developers in manifesting one 1-kg Canadian spacecraft, two 1- kg Danish spacecraft, and one 3-kg American spacecraft on a 2003 Eurockot launch. This paper outlines the approach taken by UTIAS/SFL in negotiating and securing launches for its own spacecraft in collaboration with other spacecraft developers. A summary of how this approach is applied in planning and coordinating the June 2003 Eurockot launch is also presented.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - USU (Utah State University)Same topicSpacecraft Design and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207