MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335771516 · doi:10.2514/6.2008-3225

Slewing of a Spinning Satellite by Reaction Wheels

2008· article· en· W2335771516 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ratan, Kuk Byun

Bibliographic record

VenueSpaceOps 2008 Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMicro and Nano Robotics
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinningSatelliteComputer scienceReaction wheelAerospace engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method to slew a spinning satellite in the inertial frame using reaction wheels. Presently, the slew is performed using chemical thrusters because they produce high actuation torques. The use of reaction wheels saves fuel and thus extends the mission life of the satellite. Angular momentum is loaded on the reaction wheels so that the total momentum of the satellite including the reaction wheels is zero. Then a slew torque profile is followed to achieve the slew in minimum time without stopping the spin of the satellite.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpaceOps 2008 ConferenceSame topicMicro and Nano RoboticsFrench-language works237,207