MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111492426 · doi:10.1109/milcom.1995.483651

Remote monitoring of military assets using commercial LEO satellites

2002· article· en· W2111492426 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anton Reut, Takao Hara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunications satelliteLaunchedTelecommunicationsConstellationPagingLow earth orbitCorporationSatelliteComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringFinanceAerospace engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On April 3, 1995 Orbital Communications Corporation (ORBCOMM), a subsidiary of Orbital Sciences Corporation (OSC), launched the first two of what will be a constellation of 36 low Earth orbit satellites. Working with OSC, a leading developer of small satellite technology and the low-cost launch systems (the air launched booster Pegasus), ORBCOMM has designed a system to provide low-cost mobile two-way data communications for worldwide commercial markets. The primary application areas are data communications and messaging. The project was fully funded in 1993 when Orbital Sciences and Teleglobe (Canada) entered a financing and marketing strategic alliance. US Armed Forces will be able to utilize this unique global commercial communication system without the high costs associated with developing a system solely for use by the military. Use of the ORBCOMM System by the US Armed Forces would be in-accordance with the "dual-use" policy (use of commercial assets by the military) supported by the DoD and the Commercial Satellite Communications Initiative (CSCI) directed by Congress. The US Armed Forces can effectively use the ORBCOMM System for remote asset monitoring, logistics tracking, search and rescue operations, and two-way messaging and paging.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207