MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009743692 · doi:10.2514/6.2003-2708

Lockheed Martin Response to the OSP Challenge

2003· article· en· W2009743692 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA International Air and Space Symposium and Exposition: The Next 100 Years · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Exploration and Technology
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lockheed Martin Orbital Space Plane System provides crew transfer and rescue for the International Space Station more safely and affordably than current human space transportation systems. Through planned upgrades and spiral development, it is also capable of satisfying the Nation's evolving space transportation requirements and enabling the national vision for human space flight. The OSP System, formulated through rigorous requirements definition and decomposition, consists of spacecraft and launch vehicle flight elements, ground processing facilities and existing transportation, launch complex, range, mission control, weather, navigation, communication and tracking infrastructure. The concept of operations, including procurement, mission planning, launch preparation, launch and mission operations and vehicle maintenance, repair and turnaround, is structured to maximize flexibility and mission availability and minimize program life cycle cost. The approach to human rating and crew safety utilizes simplicity, performance margin, redundancy, abort modes and escape modes to mitigate credible hazards that cannot be designed out of the system.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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