MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182336958 · doi:10.52912/jsta.2021.1.1.7

Ground Test of Docking Phase for Nanosatellite

2021· article· en· W3182336958 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

VenueJournal of Space Technology and Applications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKorea Aerospace Research Institute
KeywordsRendezvousDocking (animal)Computer scienceSimulationSpacecraftAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we describe the results of the docking phase test in the ground environment of the rendezvous/docking technology verification satellite under development for the first time in Korea. rendezvous/docking technology is a high-level technology in space technology, which is also very important for accessing and performing tasks on relative objects in space orbit. In this paper, we describe the ground test results that the chaser finally docks the fixed target using an air bearing device. Based on the thrust control algorithm in the docking phase and the relative object recognition and relative distance estimation algorithm using visual-based sensors validated in this paper, we intend to use them for later expansion to rendezvous/docking algorithms in three-dimensional space for testing in space.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.239 · 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