MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599995922 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2003.1226135

YES2 DHS: a space tether control subsystem

2004· article· en· W1599995922 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sandra Dueck, N. Gadhok, M. Kinsner, Jessica Kraut, Tom Tessier, Witold Kinsner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPayload (computing)SpacecraftInternational Space StationSatelliteMission control centerInterface (matter)Aerospace engineeringCommand and controlSystems engineeringAeronauticsEarth observationEngineeringAgency (philosophy)Computer scienceOperating systemComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the architecture and laboratory prototype implementation of the data handling subsystem (DHS) contributed by Team Canada to the Young Engineers' Satellite (YES2) project YES2 is a space-tether initiative of the European space agency uniting thirty universities in Europe, Canada, Asia, and Australia. The purpose of the DHS is to control a 35 km swinging tether for insertion of a low-mass payload into the Earth' s atmosphere from a low-orbiting spacecraft such as the International Space Station. Single event effects, absence of convective cooling, and tether length estimation are the primary design challenges. As a consequence, key software and hardware design features include radiation mitigation, power minimization, thermal mitigation, pulse detection and emphasis on discrete components. The DHS has recently undergone interface testing with teams from Spain, Italy, and Germany at the first YES2 test readiness review at ESTEC with launch scheduled on a Russian carrier for 2005.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207