Assessing the Global Availability and Reliability of the Mars Network, a Proposed Global Navigation Satellite System for Mars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1999, the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory presented a proposal for a six-satellite navigation and communication network for Mars called the Mars Network. In this paper the Mars Network proposal is evaluated in terms of availability, accuracy, and reliability as a function of position and time by simulating network geometry for users distributed across the planet. The Network is found to provide the best service to users in equatorial and polar regions but shows significant deficiencies for mid-latitude users. Instantaneous positioning is limited because of the small number of satellites in the constellation, meaning that users will have to wait for an appropriate geometry to obtain solutions. The lack of redundant observations also means that blunder detection will be difficult and will only be possible for a user making multiple observations over time. The addition of a height constraint to reduce the number of unknowns is shown to increase the range of positions on the planet where instantaneous positioning will be possible; however, instantaneous positioning is available less than one fifth of the time at low latitudes and is still not available at the poles.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".