MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322110193 · doi:10.1061/41096(366)95

Design and Tele-Operation of a Lunar Excavator for the NASA Centennial Challenge

2010· article· en· W2322110193 on OpenAlexaff
Taylor L Cooper, Amy Cheng, Ian Phillips, André Wild, J.A. Meech

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsExcavatorRegolithCentennialScraper siteAeronauticsEngineeringAerospace engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringMarine engineeringAstrobiologyPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The desire to colonize the moon has prompted an examination of ways to mine lunar regolith to create a solid foundation for NASA's 2020 Lunar Base and/or recover O2, water, or He-3. Accordingly, NASA created a Centennial Challenge directed at various North American groups to design excavators to mine regolith. Several mechanical and operational challenges exist because of the unique physical properties of regolith — high internal friction angle, high compressibility, and a very-fine particle size distribution leading to dust entrainment in excavator components. UBC-Thunderbird Robotics Team TREAD — a University of British Columbia student club — has been working for two years on a viable approach to this problem. This paper presents an effective design based on a scraper excavator from Miskin Scraper Works. Details about the NASA Centennial Challenge will also be given.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207