MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Geomagnetic Storm Risks to Air-Breathing Electric Propulsion Missions

2024· article· en· W4396875896 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Crandall, V.A. Piccone, Taiga Asanuma, Richard E. Wirz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomagnetic stormSpacecraftEarth's magnetic fieldEnvironmental scienceStormAtmospheric sciencesAerospace engineeringMeteorologyPhysicsEngineeringMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geomagnetic storms can cause significant and rapid increases in atmospheric density at very low Earth orbit (VLEO) altitudes potentially putting a VLEO spacecraft into an un-recoverable orbit. Air-breathing electric propulsion (ABEP) spacecraft may be more susceptible to geomagnetic storms due to the low thrust-to-drag chosen for many proposed spacecraft. For ABEP missions to become viable, risks due to geomagnetic storms must be mitigated. This work explores geomagnetic storm risks to ABEP spacecraft using an orbit propagator. Spacecraft with low ballistic coefficient and low thrust-to-drag are identified as highly susceptible to geomagnetic storm risks. Two risk mitigation strategies are investigated for these space-craft: (1) preemptive orbit raising ahead of a storm, and (2) using onboard xenon propellant to increase thruster performance during a storm. An orbit propagator is used to investigate performance of these risk mitigation strategies during a G4 (severe) geomagnetic storm in November 2004. It is shown that preemptive orbit raising successfully mitigates geomagnetic storm risks for spacecraft with higher thrust-to-drag while adding a relatively small amount of xenon propellant mitigates geomagnetic storm risk for all spacecraft.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics→French-language works237,207→