Technical guidelines for reduction of space weather impacts on geostationary satellites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An overview of space weather effects on geostationary satellites and engineering designs to mitigate the effects is presented. NRCan Space Weather Hazards Group's work related to the reduction of space weather impact on satellites is highlighted. It is shown that NRCan's real-time geomagnetic data can be utilized to implement practical guidelines, hitherto not proposed before, to provide warning and situational awareness of possible surface charging of satellites. Since Space Weather Hazards Group also dispenses routine forecasts of energetic electron fluence, dangerously high fluence level that signals possible impending internal charging of satellites can be forewarned 1-3 day in advance. The electron forecast web page has consistently received large numbers of visits over the years, indicating the usefulness of the electron forecast to the space community regarding internal charging. Nonetheless, the existing prediction algorithm can be further improved to provide even better electron forecasts by incorporating the high cadence of NRCan's geomagnetic data using results of studies on ULF (Ultra Low Frequency) waves in relation to electron enhancements. Attention should also be paid to possible triggers of electrostatic discharge by more closely examining natural electromagnetic transients after charging has occurred. A space weather anomaly investigation system to discern space environmental causes of satellite anomalies has been developed so that anomaly history of a particular satellite due to specific space weather conditions can be chronicled for consideration in future design modification of satellites of similar make.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.020 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".