MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W29954303 · doi:10.5694/mja17.01136

Practical horizon plane for low earth orbiting (LEO) satellite ground stations

2009· article· en· W29954303 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shkëlzen Cakaj, Michael Fischer, Arpad L. Scholtz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Telecommunications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatelliteVisibilityHorizonRemote sensingCommunications satelliteGeodesyElevation (ballistics)Ground stationGround segmentComputer scienceVisibility polygonTelecommunicationsMeteorologyAerospace engineeringGeologyGeographyPhysicsEngineeringAstronomyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communication via satellite begins when the satellite is positioned in the desired orbital position. Ground stations can communicate with LEO (Low Earth Orbiting) satellites only when the satellite is in their visibility region. The duration of the visibility and so the communication duration varies for each satellite pass at the ground station, specifically for LEO satellites which do move too fast over the Earth [1]. For low cost LEO satellite ground stations in urban environment it will be a big challenge to ensure communication down to the horizon. The communication at low elevation angles can be hindered through natural barriers. Thus, motion (appearance) detection of the satellite above natural barriers enables the practical horizon to be determined. Practical horizon differs from the ideal horizon. This paper discusses the satellites motion detection and the difference in between ideal and practical horizon. For this paper, data recorded at the Vienna satellite ground station within the Canadian space observation project MOST (Micro variability and Oscillations of Stars) are applied. Vienna ground station system was set up at the Institute for Astronomy of the University of Vienna in cooperation with the Institute of Communications and Radio- Frequency Engineering of the University of Technology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on TelecommunicationsSame topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207