Report on Mega-Constellations to the Government of Canada and the Canadian Space Agency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This document provides recommendations to the Government of Canada and the Canadian Space Agency in response to their call for feedback on the future of Canadian space exploration. The report focuses on how the construction and long-term placement of mega-constellations of satellites into Earth orbit will affect astronomy and the view of the night sky by all peoples, with attention to all Canadians. The broader discussion highlights several environmental concerns associated with the construction and maintenance of these mega-constellations. The eight recommendations here address ways that Canada can play a role in mitigating some of these negative effects through national and international initiatives. In drafting the recommendations, we take the approach that space needs to be developed sustainably. In this regard, we use the Brundtland Report's definition: "Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Thus, all recommendations here are made with the intent of minimizing the negative consequences of mega-constellations, while also recognizing that their development will continue.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".