MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997410611 · doi:10.2514/6.2020-0471

Navigation Design and Operations of MAVEN Aerobraking

2020· article· en· W2997410611 on OpenAlex

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

VenueAIAA Scitech 2020 Forum · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramSpacecraftExploration of MarsEnvironmental scienceMars landingComputer scienceAerospace engineeringMeteorologyAstrobiologyEngineeringGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the operational design and execution of the MAVEN aerobraking phase at Mars from a Navigation Team perspective. MAVEN was designed to perform atmospheric science in a ~150x6200 km altitude elliptical orbit. After the primary science mission, it was decided that MAVEN should circularize its orbit, as much as feasible from a spacecraft and mission standpoint, to better support relay operations with the landers. As a result, MAVEN performed aerobraking in the first half of 2019 to reduce its orbit to ~150x4500 km altitude. Although MAVEN did not decrease its altitude as low as previous aerobraking missions, it had several unique challenges. Science observations continued to be taken during aerobraking, requiring dramatically better Navigation accuracies than typical for such phases. Furthermore, continuous DSN coverage with 2-way Doppler data was not available. So, with 40% less Doppler data, Navigation had to meet prediction accuracies which were an order of magnitude smaller than in previous aerobraking operations. Spacecraft accelerometer data was included in Navigation analyses in order to meet these requirements.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.210 · 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