Comparison of commonly used space radiation environment models (highly elliptical high inclination orbit application)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research was undertaken to provide the radiation hazard assessment for satellites in highly elliptical orbits (HEO) based on available models of the radiation environment. This research gives qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the radiation environment on three HEO orbits. These orbits were selected as candidates for the Polar Communications and Weather mission (PCW) proposal to provide continuous communication and meteorological observations in northern areas of Canada. These orbits are 12-hr Molniya orbit, 16-hr TAP orbit, and 24-hr Tundra orbit. The analyses of the trapped radiation are made by simulations using two basic models for the radiation environment, AE8/AP8 and AE9/AP9. The model AE8/AP8 was implemented in Spenvis and is has been used during the last decades, while the AE9/AP9 model has just been released. The comparison of different models for solar proton fluences and galactic cosmic rays have also been done with use of different models available in SPENVIS tools. Comparison of these different models for the trapped radiation, solar proton fluences, and galactic cosmic rays provides the better understanding for the radiation environment on HEO orbits.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".