MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025216095 · doi:10.1360/sspma-2019-0384

Quasi-bielliptic three-body problem

2020· article· en· W3025216095 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

VenueZhongguo kexue. Wulixue Lixue Tianwenxue · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCalculus (dental)GeologyMathematicsOrthodonticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we first proposed the Quasi-Bielliptic Problem (QBEP) in the Sun-Earth-Moon three-body problem. In this model, we assume that the Moon revolves around the Earth in a quasi-elliptic orbit perturbed by the solar gravity, whereas the orbit of the Earth-Moon barycenter around the Sun has been known to be strictly elliptic. In addition, we assumed that these three celestial bodies move in the same orbital plane. The differential equations for the first-order analytical expansion of the lunar quasi-elliptic orbit were derived. Using a computational approach, these differential equations were transformed into a system of linear equations and then solved numerically. The validity of our semianalytical result was testified by comparing with the results of numerical integration. The differences between analytical results of the QBEP and the QBEP have been discussed in detail. The influences of these two eccentricities on analytical results were also investigated.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.170
Teacher spread0.163 · 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