Starling Formation-Flying Optical Experiment (StarFOX): System Design and Preflight Verification
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
The Starling Formation-Flying Optical Experiment (StarFOX) is intended as the first on-orbit demonstration of autonomous distributed angles-only navigation for spacecraft swarms. StarFOX applies the angles-only Absolute and Relative Trajectory System (ARTMS), a navigation architecture consisting of three innovative algorithms: image processing, which identifies and tracks multiple targets in images from a single camera without a priori relative orbit knowledge; batch orbit determination, which autonomously initializes orbit estimates for visible swarm members; and sequential orbit determination, which continuously refines the swarm state by fusing measurements from multiple observers exchanged over an intersatellite link. Nonlinear dynamics and measurement models provide sufficient observability to estimate absolute orbits, relative orbits, and auxiliary states using only bearing angles without maneuvers. StarFOX will be conducted using a four-CubeSat swarm as part of the NASA Starling mission, and simulations of experiment scenarios demonstrate that ARTMS meets mission performance requirements. Results indicate that mean bearing angle errors are below 35′′ ([Formula: see text]), initial target range errors are below 20% of true separation, and steady-state range errors are below 2% ([Formula: see text]). Absolute orbit estimation accuracy is on the order of 100 m. Hardware-in-the-loop tests display robust navigation under a variety of conditions, enabling autonomous, ubiquitous navigation with minimal ground interaction for future distributed missions.
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