Field Testing of an Integrated Surface/Subsurface Modeling Technique for Planetary Exploration
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there has been much interest in developing ground-penetrating radar (GPR) technology for rover-based planetary exploration, relatively little work has been done on the data collection process. Starting from the manual method, we fully automate GPR data collection using only sensors typically found on a rover. Further, we produce two novel data products: (1) a three-dimensional, photorealistic surface model coupled with a ribbon of GPR data, and (2) a two-dimensional, topography-corrected GPR radargram with the surface topography plotted above. Each result is derived from only the onboard sensors of the rover, as would be required in a planetary exploration setting. These techniques were tested using data collected in a Mars analogue environment on Devon Island in the Canadian High Arctic. GPR transects were gathered over polygonal patterned ground similar to that seen on Mars by the Phoenix Lander. Using the techniques developed here, scientists may remotely explore the interaction of the surface topography and subsurface structure as if they were on site.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it