MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fault Prognosis of Satellite Reaction Wheels Using A Two-Step LSTM Network

2021· article· en· W3187794359 on OpenAlexafffund
Md. Sirajul Islam, Afshin Rahimi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsReaction wheelSatelliteTorqueAttitude controlControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceActuatorFault (geology)Artificial neural networkOrbit (dynamics)ReactionNoise (video)Bearing (navigation)SimulationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl engineeringControl (management)Aerospace engineeringGeologyMechanical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A satellite is a system or a body that rotates around the earth or another body in space. Artificial satellites are objects deliberately positioned into an orbit. An artificial satellite should be oriented in a specific direction for maneuvering and mission objectives. Orientation-keeping is achieved with the help of an attitude control system in a satellite. Any interruption in the satellite attitude control system can prompt satellite mission limitations. Reaction wheels are the most utilized actuators in satellite attitude control systems and are inclined to premature failure. In most cases, mechanical causes of reaction wheel failure occur due to inadequate bearing lubrication and uneven frictional torque distribution, which lead to variation in motor torque. In a real-life application, motor torque variations cannot be directly measured from the onboard sensor data; hence, estimating motor torque using the available measurable data with the help of a long-short term memory recurrent neural network is proposed in this study. The normalized root mean squared error values for both noisy and noise-free simulations yield 0.01, proving the applicability of the proposed method for fault prognosis of reaction wheels in the space industry.

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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207