Simultaneous orbit and attitude optimization of planar arrays for space-based solar power beaming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent emergence of modular space-based solar power concepts has brought the topic to the forefront of alternatives for power generation. Additionally, advancements in wireless power transmission, space robotics, and reusable launch vehicles have improved the viability of space-based solar power concepts. Modular concepts have led to several benefits compared to classical space-based solar power designs in terms of improved manufacturability and assembly, they also have introduced new challenges with respect to orbital and attitude design. In particular, the coupling of sunlight collection and power beaming on opposing sides of modular configurations, such as for flat-plane sandwich configurations, requires a compromise between power collection and beaming within the orbital and attitude kinematics. This study develops a simultaneous power-beaming geometric efficiency optimization approach that integrates orbital dynamics and attitude kinematics of space-based solar power satellite arrays. The efficacy of the developed approach is demonstrated through three case studies, each reflecting typical constraints on the relative geometry of the satellite array with respect to the Sun and the ground; thereby, enabling a comprehensive exploration of various orbits. Near-optimal solutions of orbits and attitudes that maximize the efficiency of power beaming to the ground are generated, broadening the spectrum of orbits previously investigated in the literature. The approach and findings presented lay the groundwork for evaluating power-beaming systems and conducting analyses that take into account different types of perturbations.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".