MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962803927 · doi:10.1177/0954410018776418

Partially independent control scheme for spacecraft rendezvous in near-circular orbits

2018· article· en· W2962803927 on OpenAlexaff
Neng Wan, Weiran Yao, Xiang Fang, Yujiong Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendezvousSpacecraftControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Circular orbitScheme (mathematics)Computer scienceStability (learning theory)Robust controlPlane (geometry)Motion controlControl (management)Control systemMathematicsEngineeringAerospace engineeringPhysicsRobotArtificial intelligenceClassical mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the complexity and inconstancy of the space environment, accurate mathematical models for spacecraft rendezvous are difficult to retrieve, which consequently complicates the control tasks. In this paper, a linearized time-varying plant model with consideration of the external perturbations is developed to approximate the spacecraft rendezvous in near-circular orbits. In order to achieve the robust stability with optimal performance cost, a partially independent control scheme is proposed, which consists of a robust anti-windup controller for the in-plane motion and a H ∞ controller for the out-of-plane motion. The effectiveness and advantages of the partially independent control scheme are verified by comparing with other control schemes in a numerical example.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace EngineeringSame topicSpacecraft Dynamics and ControlFrench-language works237,207