MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401391697 · doi:10.3847/psj/ad55f4

Comparing Rover and Helicopter Planetary Mission Architectures in a Mars Analog Setting in Iceland

2024· article· en· W4401391697 on OpenAlex
Samantha Gwizd, K. M. Stack, Raymond Francis, Fred Calef, B. B. Carr, Chris Langley, Jamie Graff, Þorsteinn Hanning Kristinsson, Vilhjálmur Páll Thorarensen, Eiríkur Bernharðsson, Michael Phillips, Matthew Varnam, Nathan Hadland, Jahnavi Shah, J. Moersch, Udit Basu, J. R. C. Voigt, Christopher W. Hamilton

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Planetary Science Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPayload (computing)Mars Exploration ProgramExploration of MarsTerrainAeronauticsSystems engineeringComputer scienceFlight planningMission control centerAerospace engineeringEngineeringAstrobiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Rover–Aerial Vehicle Exploration Network project field-tested planetary mission operations within a Mars analog environment in Iceland using stand-alone rover and helicopter architectures. Mission planning, implementation, and results are reported for the rover mission and briefly summarized for the helicopter mission. The outcomes of both missions are subsequently compared. Field implementation occurred from 2022 July to August at the Holuhraun lava flow. The rover science operations team executed a 14 sol (Martian day) mission that achieved mission, science, and sampling goals, including the contextualization, acquisition, and planned caching of two eolian and two rock samples. The helicopter science operations team executed a plan of comparable length but emphasized different science goals given long-range flight capabilities and landing limitations. The resolution and targetability of the rover payload enabled more detailed analyses, whereas the helicopter was better able to map flow-scale morphologies. The rover’s exploration was limited by daily mobility duration limits and hazardous terrain, whereas the helicopter’s exploration was constrained by landing site hazards. Resource limitations resulted from lengthier rover drives and data-volume-intensive helicopter imaging surveys. Future missions using combined rover–helicopter architectures should account for each spacecraft’s resource needs and acknowledge system strengths in different geologic settings. Both missions served to establish operations strategies and mission outcomes to be applied to future combined rover and helicopter mission architectures, while the helicopter mission also evaluated strategies and outcomes for future stand-alone airborne missions. Findings in this work are relevant to future missions seeking to optimize strategies for planetary mission operations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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