MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171690875 · doi:10.2514/6.2006-6076

Optimal Guidance Using Density-Proportional Flightpath Angle Profile for Precision Landing on Mars

2006· article· en· W2171690875 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-François Lévesque, Jean de Lafontaine

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsNGC Aerospace (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramAtmospheric entryRobustness (evolution)AerodynamicsTrajectoryControllabilityAerospace engineeringControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceAngle of attackSimulationEngineeringPhysicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the most significant sources of landing dispersion for an autonomously guided vehicle during its atmospheric entry on Mars. Trajectory guidance strategies are to be developed in order to achieve desired terminal altitude, velocity and downrange. Recent advances in the literature showed an analytical predictor-corrector guidance solution using one or two constant flightpath angle segments. However, these algorithms demonstrate some robustness limitations from the inherent vehicle aerodynamic controllability. Therefore, a novel guidance scheme using a density-proportional flightpath angle trajectory profile is proposed in order to improve the guidance performance. Finally, the performance of the algorithm is demonstrated on atmospheric entry simulations.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and ExhibitSame topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207