Source note
Nimbus checked the public bibliographic record, the source’s research role, and the card’s stated limits.
A curated map of public papers that inform Nimbus research questions. Listing is not independent verification, reproduction, or an endorsement of every reported result.
Nimbus checked the public bibliographic record, the source’s research role, and the card’s stated limits.
Reserved for cards whose displayed substantive claims were traced to the paper. This is still not a reproduction.
Reserved for a public, versioned reproduction record with inputs, method, expected and observed outputs. No card below carries this label.
Dimitrije Jankovic · 2026 · arXiv preprint v1
Why it matters: the paper reports a cohort-specific comparison of SGP4 and high-fidelity propagation from public TLE inputs, motivating Nimbus’s question about how TLE staleness, altitude shell, and platform generation should be recorded before reuse.
Does not establish: independent orbit truth, conjunction safety, operator-grade orbit determination, or a Nimbus reproduction. The paper uses the next TLE as proxy truth and is scoped to its Starlink cohort and observation window.
LEO / NTNnot independently reproducedMohamed M. Kassem and Nishanth Sastry · 2024 · IFIP/IEEE Networking 2024
Why it matters: a simulator-design input for replayable topology deltas, changing ISL links, user terminals, satellites, and ground stations. It informs what a future LEO network fixture would need to make its topology and route assumptions inspectable.
Does not establish: Nimbus has executed the artifact, reproduced its speed or fidelity figures, or validated weather, routing, or protocol behaviour in a real constellation.
LEO / NTNpaper-reported performanceLu Hou, Kan Zheng, Jie Mei, and Cheng Huang · 2025 · IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society
Why it matters: it supplies a protocol-to-testbed-to-field-validation framing: application KPI claims should retain propagation, pacing, buffering, traffic, and stack context rather than being treated as generic “NTN performance.”
Does not establish: independent validation of the reported throughput, round-trip time, BLER, or SNR; it is not evidence that Nimbus operated the platform or that results generalise to all NTN deployments.
LEO / NTNno Nimbus testbed runDarshan Tank and Baran Nama · 2026 · arXiv preprint v1
Why it matters: it motivates Nimbus’s practice of tracking regressions alongside apparent gains: a procedure can improve one task while displacing grounding or verification on another. This informs the route-aware fixture’s emphasis on evidence and post-state checks.
Does not establish: that its nearly 6,000-run findings apply to Nimbus, every model, or every harness. Nimbus has not reproduced the benchmark, its controls, or its reported effects.
agent evaluationnot independently reproducedHengxu Li, Dongkuan Xu, Mingzhe Chen, and Yuchen Liu · 2026 · accepted at IEEE ICC 2026
Why it matters: the paper’s described intent → typed policy → bounded deterministic executor → logged outcome split is a useful design reference for keeping language-model reasoning separate from safety-sensitive execution.
Does not establish: safe autonomous radio control, deployment readiness, independently reproduced KPI results, or a production control recommendation by Nimbus.
agent × network opsno deployment claim