MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220660157 · doi:10.52912/jsta.2022.2.1.30

Scenario Design for Verification of Rendezvous Docking Technology for Nanosatellite

2022· article· en· W4220660157 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 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKorea Aerospace Research Institute
KeywordsRendezvousThrustAerospace engineeringComputer scienceTrajectorySystems engineeringSimulationEngineeringSpacecraftPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper illustrates the trajectory design of drift distance recovery after initial launch and proximity operation when verifying rendezvous/docking technology using nanosatellites. The rendezvous/docking is a technology that is the basis of on-orbit servicing technology and is a preemptive process essential for approaching a target object. In particular, since it is difficult to verify in space, nanosatellites have recently been used to reduce the risk and cost of the development stage. Therefore, this paper not only introduces the configuration and specifications of thrusters for nanosatellites but also designs relative trajectories that can take into account the thrust limitations which come from the small size and low power of nanosatellites. In addition, we intend to be helpful in later designing scenarios according to the improvement of available thruster performance through comparison of trajectories and thrust usage with cases without thrust limitations.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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