MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598873416

Preparation, Handover, and Conduction of PRISMA Mission Operations at GSOC

2012· article· en· W2598873416 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ralf Faller, Andreas Ohndorf, Benjamin Schlepp, Sabrina Eberle

Bibliographic record

Venueelib (German Aerospace Center) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMission control centerGround segmentAeronauticsGlobal Positioning SystemBaseline (sea)RendezvousEngineeringAerospaceGermanSatelliteSystems engineeringTelecommunicationsGeographyAerospace engineeringSpacecraft
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The experimental satellite project PRISMA was initiated in 2005 by Sweden, France, Denmark, and Germany, with the Swedish Space Cooperation (SSC) as the project lead. The purpose was the demonstration of necessary techniques and the validation of the respective sensor technology for future missions that involve close formation flight and rendezvous in space. At that time, the German Aerospace Center DLR was not only involved in providing satellite GPS hardware and navigation software components but also as one of the experimenters for GPS-based navigation and autonomous formation flight. The idea of also conduction a part of the flight operations phase from Germany came into discussion at the end of 2009, with the purpose of sharing mission operations cost. This was agreed by Sweden and Germany shortly before launch of the two PRISMA satellites, which took place in June 2010. Nine months later, mission operations were handed over from SSC’s control center in Solna, Stockholm, to the German Space Operations Center (GSOC) in Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany. After successful operations by GSOC, the re-hand over of the mission back to Solna was performed in August 2011. The baseline concept for the German PRISMA ground segment foresaw cloning of the Swedish ground segment developed by SSC at GSOC to minimize the development and test effort, but specific adaptations were needed to integrate PRISMA into GSOC’s multimission environment. Furthermore, the original station network, which consisted only of the Kiruna ground station in North Sweden, was extended by two additional DLR ground stations in Weilheim, Germany, and in Inuvik, Canada. That extension proved especially beneficial to the shift concept. Another important aspect was the training of the German operations personnel in a short time. This was realized by training on the job concept, which kept the additional workload for teaching and training on acceptable levels and at the same time supported the Swedish flight operations team during their operations phase. This paper gives an overview of the GSOC ground segment and the flight operations activities. It reflects the challenges with regard to personnel and to the technical implementation of PRISMA flight operations at GSOC with limited available time. It also summarizes the lessons learned after five months of successful flight operations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.008

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueelib (German Aerospace Center)Same topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207