MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321230340 · doi:10.2514/6.2010-8152

A Focusing Procedure for Nanosatellite Star Trackers

2010· article· en· W2321230340 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Dzamba, John Enright

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsStar (game theory)BitTorrent trackerStar trackerComputer scienceAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysicsEye trackingAstrophysicsSpacecraft

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accuracy of a star tracker attitude solution is directly dependent on the number stars visible to the sensor and its ability to extract direction vectors from point spread functions of stars. Improper focus of a star tracker can negatively aect both of these parameters. We propose a procedure for focusing the optics of a nanosatellite star tracker. The procedure utilizes the Siemens Sinusoidal Star pattern to measure the modulation transfer function of the sensor. We then replicate the measured data through simulation by convolving variously sized point spread functions with an image of the star pattern. The shape of the defocused systems point spread function is then used to estimate the position of image detector at various points across the sensor eld of view. Initial results show the procedure is capable of measuring the position of the image detector with an average error of approximately 0.055mm. Precise calibration of the sensor focus can lead to improved sensor performance, specically in terms of star detection and centroid accuracy.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control ConferenceSame topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207