MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044548677 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2010.5653033

Radarsat Constellation, moving toward implementation

2010· article· en· W2044548677 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jerome Colinas, Guy Séguin, Patrick Plourde

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPayload (computing)ConstellationSpacecraftLaunchedGround segmentSystems engineeringSatellite constellationComputer scienceAeronauticsSatelliteSpace researchAerospace engineeringEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Space Agency initiated the development of a three-satellite SAR mission, known as the RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM), in 2005. The main objective of the mission is to assure C-band data continuity in the next decade, while allowing a greater use of data for operational applications by providing more persistent observation over Canada and better system reliability. The Phase B contract was awarded in November 2008 for a period of 16 months. The Space and Ground Segment Requirements reviews were held at the end of February 2009. The spacecraft and Ground Segment concepts were adopted and design decisions have been taken to allow preliminary design to proceed. A Payload and Bus Preliminary Design reviews were held in Fall 2009. A Mission Preliminary Design review was held in February 2010. The CSA is currently in phase C and preparing for the Critical Design Review. Several challenges, such as the implementation of the ship detection mode or the final selection of the launcher must be resolved and important decisions must be taken to allow the progress of the program toward full implementation. The first spacecraft will be built and tested as a proto-flight and launched in 2014. The following two spacecrafts will then be built and tested in parallel and launched in 2015.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpacecraft and Cryogenic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207