# Toward Integrated Satellite Operations and Network Management: A Review and Novel Framework
## 5 Framework Evaluation
### Framework Validation and Performance Analysis  
The CMS framework has been validated through simulation studies using a prototype implementation tested against traditional satellite scheduling approaches. The validation employed a 16-satellite LEO constellation scenario based on real-world parameters, comparing the CMS against a baseline semi-manual operator using best-effort scheduling without business criteria optimization. This section summarizes the obtained results in this validation, reported with more detailed in [90]. The validation tested two primary constraint scenarios: (1) contact time-constrained scenarios with varying user loads (57,636 to 172,909 users), and (2) memory-constrained scenarios with different onboard capacity limitations (5-20 MB reserved memory). Performance metrics included task completion rates, data throughput, latency optimization, and priority task management across multiple resource saturation levels. The CMS demonstrated the following substantial performance improvements in the tested scenario:  
* **Task Assignment and Completion:** The CMS achieved task completion improvements of 17.87% for moderate loads (57,636 users) and 44.02% for high loads (115,273 users) compared to the baseline approach. Even under heavily saturated conditions (172,909 users), the CMS maintained priority task allocation capabilities that the baseline could not achieve. * **Throughput Optimization:** Data throughput improvements ranged from 25.09% to 93.62% depending on task type and scenario constraints. The CMS consistently achieved equal or superior throughput compared to manual approaches across all tested configurations, with the most significant improvements observed in MTDL under resource-constrained conditions. * **Priority Management:** The CMS demonstrated effective business criteria integration, achieving 20.14% better high-priority task completion rates in moderate load scenarios and up to 32.78% improvement in severely memory-constrained environments (5 MB reserved capacity). The framework successfully prioritized high-priority tasks over low-priority ones, while baseline approaches showed no consistent prioritization capability. * **Resource Efficiency:** Under memory constraints, the CMS maintained superior performance across all tested capacity levels, with task completion rates of 89.05% (20 MB), 86.09% (15 MB), 81.66% (10 MB), and 42.9% (5 MB) compared to baseline rates of 76.92%, 75.62%, 70.35%, and 34.14%, respectively. * **Scalability and Computational Performance:** Initial scalability analysis demonstrates the CMS framework's computational characteristics across different constellation sizes. For single satellite operations, the framework achieves 54,881 scores per second with 765,692 optimization steps. When scaling to 12 satellites (95 contacts), performance reaches 22,766 scores per second (41.48% relative performance) with 383,130 optimization steps (50.04% relative). For larger constellations of 48 satellites (380 contacts), the system achieves 3,877 scores per second (7.06% relative) with 37,118 optimization steps (4.85% relative). At 144 satellites (1120 contacts), performance reaches 1045 scores per second (1.90% relative) with 12,861 optimization steps (1.68% relative). Computational efficiency scales with available processing cores, showing 135.19% performance improvement with 2 cores, 149.01% with 3 cores, and 187.61% with 4 cores compared to single-core execution. The CMS scheduling optimization operates within practical time constraints, with algorithm termination criteria set to five minutes maximum duration and one minute without score improvement. The hierarchical constraint satisfaction approach ensures feasible solutions are found quickly through construction heuristics, while local search refinement provides optimized results within acceptable computational overhead for operational deployment.