Adaptive Control and Control Allocation for Spacecraft Formation Flying under Perturbations, Uncertainies, and Faults
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spacecraft formation flying has been identified as an enabling technology. Researchers are focusing lots of efforts towards the development of autonomous control algorithms. Specifically, control laws are responsible for actuating the thrusters of the chaser spacecraft such that a relative desired trajectory is kept between the chaser and the target spacecraft. This research addresses fault tolerant control laws for spacecraft formation flying such that the chaser can accurately track a desired relative trajectory regardless of thruster faults, dynamical uncertainties, and perturbations. A controller based on simple adaptive control theory (SAC) is tested and compared to three other control laws in numerical simulation. All control laws are tested for three types of actuator failures: loss of effectiveness, stuck actuators, and total failure. Moreover, SAC is implemented for an over actuated system. Two control allocation algorithms based on optimization techniques are used to distribute the control signals among the healthier actuators.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it