MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892163856 · doi:10.1109/aero.2019.8741999

Accurate Star Tracker Simulation with On-Orbit Data Verification

2019· article· en· W2892163856 on OpenAlex
Laila Kazemi, John Enright

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStar trackerVignettingComputer scienceCalibrationNoise (video)FidelityComputer visionArtificial intelligenceDistortion (music)SpacecraftPixelPhysicsEngineeringOpticsImage (mathematics)Aerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we develop strategies to simulate high-fidelity star tracker images. Improving simulation fidelity enables better quantitative predictions of sensor performance, particularly during agile attitude maneuvers. These high-fidelity simulations use star tracker calibration parameters, detector sensitivity, and a simple representation of the spacecraft's attitude trajectories to synthesize images useful for detailed study of the star tracker accuracy and availability. The simulations include a variety of non-ideal imaging features such as pixel noise, vignetting, distortion, and nonlinear star tracks. The effectiveness of these high-fidelity simulations is assessed by comparing image features and processed sensor measurements obtained from synthetic images with those extracted from the laboratory, night-sky, and on-orbit sensor telemetry.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207