Martian Gardens: Student Designs of Bio-Regenerative Life Support Systems in a 1st Year Undergraduate Seminar Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph"><i>The following abstract is that provided to first year undergraduate students as part of the recruitment effort for 1</i><i><sup>st</sup></i> <i>Year Seminar Courses at the University of Guelph.</i></div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">When humankind begins the colonization of the moon or Mars, we will be bringing along more of Earth than one might think. A number of space and government agencies around the world, including researchers at the Controlled Environment Systems Research Facility, University of Guelph, are involved in the design and engineering of self-contained ecosystems based on Earthly biological processes. These processes can be harnessed, with complementary physical and chemical technologies to support human life (food production, air revitalization, psychology) in the hostile conditions of space.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">Using a problem based learning approach, students registered in this seminar course will study a variety of international projects devoted life support systems development including those of the Canadian Space Agency, European Space Agency and NASA. Students will rely on each other3s interdisciplinary background to design a Martian habitat and life support system that is sustainable, while meeting the challenges of keeping crew happy in a sealed environment. The political issues associated with human space exploration and the ethical questions it arises will be tackled using a variety of group discussions, presentations and debates.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">The course instructors highly encourage enrolment from students with backgrounds and interest in a variety of disciplines including the life and physical sciences, the social sciences and engineering.</div>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".