Correction to: Path Planning of Spacecraft Cluster Orbit Reconstruction Based on ALPIO (Remote Sensing, (2022), 14, 19, (4768), 10.3390/rs14194768)
Remote Sensing, ISSN: 2072-4292, Vol: 15, Issue: 6
2023
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Correction Description
In the original article [1], “strong robustness [12]” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 1”, “Paragraph 3”, and should read: “strong robustness [12,13]”. In the original article, “C-W equation” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 2”, “Section 2.2”, “Paragraph 1”, and should read: “C-W equation [20]”. In the original article, “The velocities v(i) and v(i) before and after the maneuver at the ith discrete point” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 3”, “Section 3.1”, “Paragraph 1”, and should read: “The velocities v(i) and v(i) before and after the maneuver at the ith discrete point are expressed as follows [21]”. In the original article, “Figure 4” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 3”, “Section 3.2.2”, “Paragraph 1”, and should read: “Figure 4. (a) Path entering the dangerous area and (b) path not entering the dangerous area [29]”. In the original article, “Cauchy mutation” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 4”, “Section 4.4”, “Paragraph 3”, and should read: “Cauchy mutation [34]”. In the original article, “The second stage of the PIO is the landmark operator” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 4”, “Section 4.5”, “Paragraph 1”, and should read: “The second stage of the PIO is the landmark operator [11]”. In the original article, “Gaussian mutation” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 4”, “Section 4.5”, “Paragraph 2”, and should read: “Gaussian mutation [35]”. In the original article, “CGAPIO” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in “Section 5”, “Section 5.1”, “Paragraph 1”, and should read: “CGAPIO [35]”. Due to adding new References, the numeration of References with respect to the original publication has been modified. References [2,3,4,5,6,7] will appear in the document as References [13,20,21,29,34,35] respectively. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused and state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. The original publication has also been updated.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know