MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117011041

Determining the Range of an Artificial Satellite Using its Observed Trigonometric Parallax

2005· article· en· W3117011041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael A. Earl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistorical Astronomy and Related Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallaxSatelliteObserver (physics)TrigonometrySkyRemote sensingGeodesyRange (aeronautics)AstronomyPhysicsGeologyMathematicsGeometryAerospace engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observing artificial satellites is a relatively new and unique branch of astronomy that is very interesting and dynamic. One specific aspect of observing these objects is that although they appear amongst the celestial background, as deep-sky objects do, their apparent locations amongst this background depend on where you are standing on Earth at a given time. This effect is known as parallax. When a satellite is observed at a specific time from a specific location, the satellite's equatorial coordinates can be determined using astrometric means. Its range from the observer, however, is still unknown unless the observer knows the satellite's precise orbit elements or has easy access to a radar station. However, when two or more observers, separated by some distance, observe the same satellite at the same time, their observations can be used to determine the range of the satellite using the satellite's observed trigonometric parallax.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Astronomical Society of CanadaSame topicHistorical Astronomy and Related StudiesFrench-language works237,207