MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2539597071 · doi:10.1109/milcom.1990.117442

Meteor burst in the post 2000 era

2002· article· en· W2539597071 on OpenAlexaff
C. Marriott, Vitalice K. Oduol, Amitabha Ghosh, B. Tailor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsMPB Technologies & Communications (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityMeteor (satellite)Computer scienceThroughputChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsJammingInterference (communication)Communications systemComputer networkWirelessWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years a renewed interest has been shown in the possibility of using meteor burst links in tactical communications, both for networking and covert operations. Some of the applications that recent performance improvements would permit are evaluated. In evaluating the feasibility of a meteor burst implementation, certain technical and physical limitations are addressed. For the success of these applications, interoperability with other communication systems is necessary. The level of interoperability with other media, and the standards necessary to assure this interoperability are examined. Methods of minimizing and combating jamming are proposed. Meteor burst systems can be used in a large number of applications within a tactical environment. The principal disadvantage of the meteor burst medium is the problem of interference to other spectrum users from the probe end, and the interference from other users at the receiver end. The low throughput characteristic of meteor burst compares with some of the channel capacities used in other systems. Interoperability with other networks or communications links is relatively easy if certain straightforward protocols and standards are established.>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.190
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstro and Planetary Science→French-language works237,207→