MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994008185 · doi:10.2514/1.a32352

Estimation and Analysis of Two-Line Elements for Small Satellites

2013· article· en· W1994008185 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin Kahr, Oliver Montenbruck, Kyle O’Keefe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Spacecraft and Rockets · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemAerospaceComputer scienceLow earth orbitOrbit (dynamics)GeodesyLine (geometry)Orbit determinationAerospace engineeringRemote sensingSatelliteGeologyTelecommunicationsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an assessment of two-line element sets for one nano- and two micro-satellites in low Earth orbit. Both the publicly available element sets issued by the North American Aerospace Defense Command and element sets estimated from GPS tracking data are assessed. The nanosatellite, which carries an intermittently operated dual-frequency GPS receiver, presents one of the first opportunities to assess two-line-element accuracy for an object measuring only using precise reference orbits. The larger satellites provide continuous GPS coverage as well as insight into the impact of maneuvers and formation flying on two-line element sets. It is found that, overall, the North American Aerospace Defense Command two-line element sets provide reliable position information accurate to a few kilometers for small satellites in low Earth orbit and that, with an arc length similar to the North American Aerospace Defense Command, two-line elements estimated from continuous GPS data or even intermittent GPS data collected sufficiently often can improve the spread of five-day along-track propagation errors from 10 km down to 2 km for a nanosatellite.

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)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Spacecraft and RocketsSame topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207