MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125638337 · doi:10.1177/0954410011414991

Non-linear solution to the maximum height orbit transfer guidance problem

2011· article· en· W2125638337 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Afshari, Ehsan Taheri

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravitational fieldSpacecraftThrustPerturbation (astronomy)Orbit (dynamics)MathematicsRendezvousControl variableApplied mathematicsControl theory (sociology)Mathematical analysisPhysicsComputer scienceClassical mechanicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An optimal control solution to the highly non-linear problem of orbit transfer mission is achieved by using a newly proposed analytical perturbation technique. The problem is classified as a two-point boundary value problem in order to optimize a performance measure in a given time. Assuming a constant thrust operating in a given length of time, it is sought to find the thrust direction history of a transfer from a given initial orbit to the largest possible orbit. The system dynamical model is stated by regarding a variable mass spacecraft moving in the variable gravitational field of the Earth, based on the two-body problem. To assess the perturbation solution fidelity, a numerical solution based on the Gauss pseudospectral method has been employed. The main novelty of this work is in applying a new analytical solution strategy that is a combination of perturbation technique and backward integration to a highly non-linear problem in the calculus of variations approach.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace EngineeringSame topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207