MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186872833 · doi:10.2514/6.2015-4645

The "Master Enabler" - In-Orbit Servicing

2015· article· en· W2186872833 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

VenueAIAA SPACE 2015 Conference and Exposition · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Design and Technology
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnablingComputer scienceOrbit (dynamics)Aerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some of the most noteworthy missions in space exploration have occurred in the last two decades and owe their success to on-orbit servicing. The tremendously successful Hubble Space Telescope repair and upgrade missions, as well as the completed assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) and its full utilization, lead us to the next chapter and set of challenges. These include fully exploiting the many space systems already launched, assembling large structures in situ thereby enabling new scientific discoveries, and providing systems that reliably and cost-effectively support the next steps in space exploration. In-orbit servicing is a tool--a tool that can serve as the master enabler to create space architectures that would otherwise be unattainable. This paper will survey how NASA's satellite-servicing technology development efforts are being applied to the planning and execution of two such ambitious missions, specifically asteroid capture and the in-space assembly of a very large life-finding telescope.

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)0.000
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 score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.190 · 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