MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105130872 · doi:10.1109/smc-it.2006.44

Lightweight Service Architectures for Space Missions

2006· article· en· W2105130872 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityArchitectureDistributed computingService-oriented architectureFault toleranceReusabilityService (business)Space-based architectureApplications architectureReference architectureDatabase-centric architectureComputer architectureEmbedded systemSoftware architectureWeb serviceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Service architectures provide mechanisms for transactions and for the aggregation and composition of services, including monitoring and self-actuation within the architecture. In this paper we present an architecture appropriate for the computationally limited environment of space missions. We address the ever-increasing time and cost of developing and operating the information systems that space missions embody through the composition of services in this lightweight architecture. A lightweight, service-oriented architecture (SOA) can simplify system design and can support advanced computing concepts such as autonomic logistics and autonomic computing (Hartman, 2004). The unifying idea in a light weight service architecture (LWSA) is to abstract away idiosyncrasies of development, connection and use. Computational nodes in such an architecture are loosely coupled and inherit the advantages associated with networks in general including fault tolerance, reusability, scalability, performance and cost

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207