MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040946377 · doi:10.1117/12.665884

3D inspection for the Shuttle return to flight

2006· article· en· W2040946377 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

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Exploration and Technology
Canadian institutionsNeptec Design Group (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace ShuttleCrew3d scanningLaser scanningSpace Shuttle thermal protection systemComputer scienceDoorsSpace suitAerospace engineeringSpacecraftAeronauticsRemote sensingSimulationEngineeringComputer visionLaserOpticsPhysicsThermalGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NASA contracted Neptec to provide the Laser Camera System (LCS), a 3D scanning laser sensor, for the on-orbit inspection of the Space Shuttle's Thermal Protection System (TPS) on the return-to-flight mission STS-114. The scanner was mounted on the boom extension to the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS). Neptec's LCS was selected due to its close-range accuracy, large scanning volume and immunity to the harsh ambient lighting of space. The crew of STS-114 successfully used the LCS to inspect and measure damage to the Discovery Shuttle TPS in July, 2005. The crew also inspected the external-tank (ET) doors to ensure that they were fully closed. Neptec staff also performed operational support and real-time detailed analysis of the scanned features using analysis workstations at Mission Control Center (MCC) in Houston. This paper provides a summary of the on-orbit scanning activities and a description of the results detailed in the analysis.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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