On-board vs Ground Spectral Unmixing Simulator
Monte Carlo simulation comparing on-board spectral processing vs ground-based analysis. Analyze trade-offs between bandwidth, latency, and survey efficiency for asteroid prospecting.
Simulation Parameters
Key Trade-offs
- + On-board: Fast decisions, low bandwidth
- - On-board: Limited processing power
- + Ground: Powerful analysis, detailed results
- - Ground: High latency, bandwidth intensive
Metrics Comparison
Run simulation to see comparison chart
Comparison Results
Configure the parameters and run the simulation to compare on-board vs ground processing.
Simulation Methodology
This simulation models NEA encounter opportunities and analyzes how processing location affects survey success rates. Each encounter has a limited observation window during which data must be captured, processed, and acted upon.
- On-board processing: Downlinks only processed results (~10 MB), enabling fast autonomous decisions
- Ground processing: Downlinks raw hyperspectral data (~100s MB), requires round-trip communication
- Encounters are missed if bandwidth or latency exceeds observation window
- Latency includes transmission time, light delay, and processing time
Results help determine whether on-board edge computing is worth the development cost for prospecting missions.
This simulator was built to investigate research question RQ-0-2: On-board vs ground spectral unmixing
View Prospecting Satellites BOM Item