MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388998246 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2023.060707

Artificial intelligence for satellite communications and geophysics: current and future trends

2023· article· en· W4388998246 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qiu Yi-zhou, Jiarong Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBig Data Technologies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataCommunications satelliteProcess (computing)BoomField (mathematics)TelecommunicationsComputer scienceData scienceArtificial intelligenceEngineeringSatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2010, Artificial Intelligence (AI) made a breakthrough, and the technology breakthrough in the industry red line became the common expectation of the society. Driven by both market demand and national policies, the AI boom swept through China. Since the 21st century, the information superhighway has rapidly emerged, and communication technology represented by satellite communication has become increasingly important in the country's economic development. In addition, geophysics under earth sciences has also made numerous breakthroughs in theory and practice, bringing a wide range of application value for social development. There are many crossovers between the fields of communication engineering and machine learning. Geoscience has high requirements for complex and changing heterogeneous and multimodal data, and being able to analyze and process big data in combination with artificial intelligence is a direction that many scholars are exploring. This paper introduces the status of applying two technical fields of artificial intelligence in satellite communications and geophysics to explore the impact of computer technology in the research of the two fields and to look forward to the future development trend of the cooperation between the three.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.426
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.071 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence PracticeSame topicBig Data Technologies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207