Assessing the Acceptability of Science Operations Concepts and the Level of Mission Enhancement of Capabilities for Human Mars Exploration Extravehicular Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT) research project is investigating tools, techniques, and strategies for conducting Mars scientific exploration extravehicular activity (EVA). This has been accomplished through three science-driven terrestrial field tests (BASALT-1, BASALT-2, and BASALT-3) during which the iterative development, testing, assessment, and refinement of concepts of operations (ConOps) and capabilities were conducted. ConOps are the instantiation of operational design elements that guide the organization and flow of personnel, communication, hardware, software, and data products to enable a mission concept. Capabilities include the hardware, software, data products, and protocols that comprise and enable the ConOps. This paper describes the simulation quality and acceptability of the Mars-forward ConOps evaluated during BASALT-2. It also presents the level of mission enhancement and acceptability of the associated Mars-forward capabilities. Together, these results inform science operations for human planetary exploration.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".