MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1651930951

An Orbit Design Method to Support Small Body Interior Radar Studies

2004· article· en· W1651930951 on OpenAlexaff
L. Alberto Cangahuala, G. Minett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEccentricity (behavior)Orbit (dynamics)Radiation pressurePopulationRadarSpacecraftAerospace engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsGeodesyGeologyOpticsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consider a spacecraft equipped with a radar system that can generate signal returns from both the front and back ends of, as well as any significant voids or composition transitions in, a small body. For the purpose of determining the internal structure and inferring the composition of the body, it is necessary to collect returns from directions that encompass the whole body. Operational constraints include minimization of the survey duration and costs, and an unfamiliarity of the target shape, spin period and direction before arrival. This paper describes an approach that is robust for a variety of small body shapes and spin directions. The first part of this strategy uses orbits that are stable with respect to solar radiation pressure, at distances where the irregular shape is not a significant consideration. The second part uses orbit orientations that provide coverage at high latitudes not reached in the first part. One forces the eccentricity to evolve from an initial value through zero and back up, typically stretching out the useful time period over a couple of weeks, allowing for safe polar observations. This secular orbit evolution in the second part of the strategy is shown through averaging of the perturbing potential due to the solar radiation pressure force, as well as through numerical simulations. This paper shows orbit selections and coverage metrics for various small bodies, with masses, spin directions and rates that are representative of the observed subset of the total population.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207