MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391169526 · doi:10.2514/1.g007725

Optimal Pose Design for Close-Proximity On-Orbit Inspection

2024· article· en· W4391169526 on OpenAlexafffund
Sepideh Faghihi, Siavash Tavana, Anton de Ruiter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Guidance Control and Dynamics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsOrbit (dynamics)Computer scienceComputer visionAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Close-proximity on-orbit inspection is a critical ability to initiate on-orbit servicing operations, required technology for space exploration missions. It is challenging to solve an optimal inspection trajectory planning problem that provides a complete target observation due to major difficulties. First, the inspection requirements must be defined and imposed on the problem as a set of path constraints that result in a nondeterministic-polynomial-time-hard problem. Second, the optimization problem, including highly nonconvex constraints, is very difficult to solve directly using an optimal control solver. Additionally, it requires proper initialization of states and control variables, which is critical in such problems. To overcome these difficulties, this paper proposes a novel formulation and method of solution for a full six-degrees-of-freedom optimal inspection motion planning problem. Optimal inspection trajectories are designed for a rigid-body spacecraft, which performs close, continuous, and complete observation of rigid, nonrotating, and nonaccelerating known targets. The inspection and collision avoidance constraints are defined in explicit forms that rectify the nondifferentiability of the problem and satisfy the inspection requirements. A pseudospectral optimal control solver is implemented to numerically solve the trajectory optimization problem. The proposed methodology is applicable to any robotic inspection mission. Simulations are presented as a validation of the proposed methodology and the achieved optimality.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Guidance Control and DynamicsSame topicSpace Satellite Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207