MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332674640 · doi:10.2514/6.2004-3223

Satellite Communications Requirements for a Dual Use Disaster Management Ka Band Network

2004· article· en· W2332674640 on OpenAlexaff
Hans Kruse, Alan Baer, Robert Lewis, Richard Krawczyk, Frank Gargione

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersAir Force Research LaboratoryNASA Headquarters
KeywordsKa bandCommunications satelliteSatelliteComputer scienceDual (grammatical number)Satellite broadcastingMulti-band deviceTelecommunicationsComputer networkEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Late in 2003 we had the opportunity to work closely with a number of small communities affected by the devastating wildfires that hit San Diego county during that time. We were struck by the fact that these communities faced a very complex logistical problem, namely the near-simultaneous rebuilding of around 90% of the buildings in town, owned by a large number of individuals with no formal connection other than being residents of the same community. Traditional disaster relief responders address safety and financial issues, but offer little logistical assistance. In this paper we apply the same requirements analysis one would use for a logistics problem of this type were it part of a commercial or government project. We present a generic system design and requirements for this system as well as the communications links supporting the system. We show that current low-cost satellite links can meet some – but not all – requirements, and that recent advances in satellite and ground systems technology suggest that in the near future satellite links will be able to support the stated requirements at acceptable cost. A prototype implementation of the system described in this paper is in progress.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207