MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494736339 · doi:10.4271/2004-01-2586

Mars Analog Station Cognitive Testing (MASCOT): Results of First Field Season

2004· article· en· W1494736339 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jan Osburg, Walter Sipes

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramField (mathematics)Computer scienceCognitionMascotAstrobiologyPsychologyMathematicsNeurosciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the factors influencing crew performance under conditions of long-term isolation, confinement, high workload and elevated risk is an important prerequisite to the manned space exploration missions beyond low-Earth orbit that are planned under the new National Space Policy of the United States. Quantitatively tracking the performance of crews affected by those stressors is therefore crucial both during actual space missions and as part of precursor activities on the ground, such as those taking place at planetary-analog simulation facilities. During the summer of 2003, an experiment was carried out tracking the cognitive performance of the crew on board such a facility, the Mars Society’s “Flashline Mars Arctic Research Station” in the Canadian High Arctic. In addition to the self-administered computer-based testing, the crew’s daily activities were logged to enable the identification of external factors that might affect the observed performance. The results provide insight into the variation of crewmembers’ cognitive performance over time in the presence of a variety of stressors caused by the environment, their ambitious exploration program, station systems operation, and group interaction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207