MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1580578952 · doi:10.4271/2008-01-2046

The Orion Air Monitor; an Optimized Analyzer for Environmental Control and Life Support

2008· article· en· W1580578952 on OpenAlexaff
David E. Burchfield, William Niu, George Steiner, William O’Hara, John F. Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Aerospace · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectrum analyzerEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingEngineeringMeteorologyComputer sciencePhysicsTelecommunicationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the requirements for and design implementation of an air monitor for the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). The air monitor is specified to monitor oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, and carbon dioxide, and participates with the Environmental Control Life Support System (ECLSS) pressure control system and Atmosphere Revitalization System (ARS) to help maintain a breathable and safe environment. The sensing requirements are similar to those delivered by the International Space Station (ISS) air monitor, the Major Constituent Analyzer or MCA (1, 2 and 3), and the predecessors to that instrument, the Skylab Mass Spectrometer (4, 5), although with a shift in emphasis from extended operations to minimized weight. The Orion emphasis on weight and power, and relatively simpler requirements on operating life, allow optimization of the instrument toward the mass of a sensor assembly. The Air Monitor is more integral with Orion's ARS, simplifying the sampling system relative to the MCA, the verification assembly has been greatly simplified, and the electronics have been redesigned around a simple controller, allowing the design to come in at under 15 pounds.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of AerospaceSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207