An international approach to lunar exploration in preparation for Mars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Aurora Program in Europe and The vision for space exploration in the United States is representative of a shift in space policies worldwide toward the goal of human and robotic exploration. Although some details differ, these plans share a common theme of expansion of a human presence across the solar system. In particular, the plans involve near-term exploration of the Moon in preparation for eventual human missions to Mars. Given the current relevance of the topic and the international nature of space exploration as expressed in these policies, the International Space University, with sponsorship from the European Space Agency (ESA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Canadian Technology Company Optech, Inc., has assigned a group of post-graduate students and professionals the task of evaluating the Moon as a test bed for Mars. This analysis includes not only the critical technologies and operational capabilities needed for Mars exploration but also the political, legal, and social context in which the effort will be undertaken. Upon identifying the enabling concepts that can be rehearsed in the context of near-term lunar exploration, the team proposes a design for a set of lunar missions and analyzes the associated policy framework. This paper is a summary of the more comprehensive 122-page report. The team consists of 47 future space leaders from 17 countries around the world. This situation presented a unique set of challenges. Organizing a group this large and diverse to produce a single consistent report required a carefully conceived structure and a great deal of flexibility from each team member. On the other hand, with these considerable challenges overcome, the report presents a truly international, intercultural, and interdisciplinary perspective on how to extend humanity's presence beyond the confines of Earth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".