MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110477050 · doi:10.2514/6.2007-9920

An Approach for Calculating the Cost of Launch Vehicle Reliability

2007· article· en· W2110477050 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringComputer scienceAeronauticsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this paper is to determine the cost of increasing launch vehicle reliability during conceptual design. The launch vehicle mission requirements are held constant while various reliability strategies are evaluated for their affects on different performance and cost metrics. Traditional design disciplines, such as trajectory analysis and propulsion are included within the performance analysis while the cost discipline focuses on launch vehicle development and production cost. The reliability modeling is developed specifically for application to launch vehicles. A design environment is created that integrates the performance, cost, and reliability disciplines for use with optimization. The integrated environment is utilized to determine a set of optimal design configurations based on a specific weighting of cost and reliability. Different design options for the Cargo Launch Vehicle from the Exploration System Architecture Study are considered and the final result is a set of configurations optimized for a particular weighting of cost and reliability.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207