MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110610429 · doi:10.2514/1.62154

Optimal Control of Nanosatellite Fast Deorbit Using Electrodynamic Tether

2014· article· en· W2110610429 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Zhong, Zheng Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Guidance Control and Dynamics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Optimal controlDiscretizationTrajectoryPiecewiseTrajectory optimizationOrbit (dynamics)Collocation (remote sensing)PhysicsComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical optimizationControl (management)EngineeringAerospace engineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a piecewise two-phased optimal control scheme for fast nanosatellite deorbit by a short electrodynamic tether. The first phase concerns the open-loop control trajectory optimization, where the optimal control problem is formulated only for the tether libration motion by assuming the slow-varying orbital elements of the electrodynamic tether system as constant within a discretized interval. The second phase deals with the closed-loop optimal control for tracking the derived optimal reference trajectory subject to multiple major orbital perturbations. The finite receding horizon control method is used in the optimal trajectory tracking. Both optimal control problems are solved by a direct collocation method based on the Hermite–Simpson method using discretization schemes with coincident nodes. The resulting nonlinear programming problem significantly reduces the problem size and improves the computational efficiency. Numerical results for fast nanosatellite deorbit by an electrodynamic tether in both equatorial and highly inclined orbits show the proposed method achieves high control accuracy and efficiency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations57
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Guidance Control and DynamicsSame topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207