Minimization of Vibration of Spacecraft Appendages During Shape Control Using Smart Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the range ( i 23.0 deg, 23.0 deg) or j h 2 j > 35 deg to avoid an S1-S2 close-contact possibility. Note again that arriving at these conclusions throughMC analysis is computationallydemanding and time consuming because many combinations have to be tried in which a large number of simulations (orbit propagation) for each of the combinations is carried out. Althoughthe strategyis demonstratedin the case of two satellites, it can be used even when there are more satellites to nd deployment conditionsfor each satellite to avoida close-contactpossibility among all of them. A system of separation springs for satellites can be designed to meet the noncollisionseparationvelocity taking into account themasses.Also, orientationcan be plannedthroughproper control strategies. The orientation angle leading to recontact of P and S1 and P and S2 can also be computed using this strategy. For this example, no angle leads to such a recontactpossibilitybetween P and S1 and an angle of approximately90 deg leads to the collision of P and S2.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".