MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414512846 · doi:10.3233/scc-2002-291

Satellite communications in disaster management: Selected Canadian systems

2002· article· en· W4414512846 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. B. Hamilton, Peter Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace Communications · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityCommunications satelliteEmergency managementThe InternetCommunications systemProtocol (science)Communications protocolInternet ProtocolSatellite system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of telecommunications in general throughout an emergency management situation is outlined. No single telecommunications system can meet all emergency management needs. Consequently, interoperability among systems and protocols is a major issue. The increasing use of Internet Protocol based applications has alleviated some of those concerns. However, because space based technologies are in widespread use for management of most major events, and since Internet Protocol is intolerant of high latency, satellite‐specific techniques to mitigate latency should be adopted. The increasing use of the Global Positioning System for personnel and asset tracking is noted. The paper concludes by providing an overview of Canadian solutions to three differing disaster scenarios: a specific threat to a specific region; emergencies requiring communication with moving vehicles by satellite; and a system having a full feature set which can be transported to a major incident site. Created through three independent projects, these systems provide Canada with broad communications capabilities for meeting the needs imposed by disasters.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpace CommunicationsSame topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207