MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412021564 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2025.3586036

CubeSat-Enabled Free-Space Optics: Joint Data Communication and Fine Beam Tracking

2025· article· en· W4412021564 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Safi, Mohammad Taghi Dabiri, Julian Cheng, Iman Tavakkolnia, Harald Haas

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFree-space optical communicationCubeSatFree spaceLaser beamsJoint (building)OpticsTracking (education)Beam (structure)Optical communicationComputer sciencePhysicsAerospace engineeringElectronic engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringLaserSatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of CubeSats with Free Space Optical (FSO) links accelerates a major advancement in high-throughput, low-Earth orbit communication systems. However, CubeSats face challenges such as size, weight, and power (SWaP) limitations, as well as vibrations that cause fluctuations in the angle-of-arrival (AoA) of the optical beam at the receiver. These practical challenges make establishing CubeSat-assisted FSO links complicated. To mitigate AoA fluctuations, we expand the receiver's field of view and track the location of the focused beam spot using an array of avalanche photodiodes at the receiver. Initially, we model the optical channel between the transmitter and the detector array. Furthermore, to reduce the computational load of maximum likelihood sequence detection, which is infeasible for CubeSats due to SWaP constraints, we propose a sub-optimal blind sequence data detection approach that relies on the generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT) criterion. We also utilize combining methods such as equal gain combining (EGC) and maximal ratio combining (MRC) for data detection, benchmarking their performance against the GLRT-based method. Numerical results demonstrate that the proposed low-complexity GLRT-based method outperforms the combining methods, achieving performance close to that of the ideal receiver.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207