Practical horizon plane for low earth orbiting (LEO) satellite ground stations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".