A Management Model for International Participation in Space Exploration Missions
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
This paper proposes an engineering management model for NASA's future space exploration missions based on past experiences working with the International Partners of the International Space Station. The authors have over 25 years of combined experience working with the European Space Agency, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Canadian Space Agency, Italian Space Agency, Russian Space Agency, and their respective contractors in the design, manufacturing, verification, and integration of their elements electric power system into the United States on-orbit segment. The perspective presented is one from a specific sub-system integration role and is offered so that the lessons learned from solving issues of technical and cultural nature may be taken into account during the formulation of international partnerships. Descriptions of the types of unique problems encountered relative to interactions between international partnerships are reviewed. Solutions to the problems are offered, taking into consideration the technical implications. Through the process of investigating each solution, the important and significant issues associated with working with international engineers and managers are outlined. Potential solutions are then characterized by proposing a set of specific methodologies to jointly develop spacecraft configurations that benefits all international participants, maximizes mission success and vehicle interoperability while minimizing cost.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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