MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415049822 · doi:10.1177/15311074251382156

The Abiotic Background as a Central Component of a Sample Safety Assessment Protocol for Sample Return

2025· article· en· W4415049822 on OpenAlexaff
Bronwyn L. Teece, D. W. Beaty, Heather V. Graham, Barbara Sherwood Lollar, Sandra Siljeström, A. Steele

Bibliographic record

VenueAstrobiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIon-surface interactions and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersGoddard Space Flight CenterJet Propulsion LaboratoryAmes Research CenterCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCenters for Disease Control and PreventionJohnson Space CenterU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsAbiotic componentProtocol (science)Sample (material)BiosphereMartianMars Exploration ProgramContainment (computer programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Martian rock and regolith samples are being collected and cached by NASA's Perseverance rover, with the goal of returning them to Earth as soon as the mid-2030s. Upon return, samples would be housed in a sample receiving facility under biological containment to prevent exposing Earth's biosphere to any potential biohazards that might be present. Samples could be released from high containment for scientific investigations if they are found to be safe or are sterilized. The Sample Safety Assessment Protocol Tiger Team (SSAP-TT) was convened by the Sample Receiving Project between August 2023 and August 2024 and tasked with the development of a Sample Safety Assessment Protocol (SSAP). The result of this work is a proposed three-step protocol, supported by Bayesian statistical hypothesis testing, to assess the risk as to whether returned samples contain modern martian biology that could represent a biohazard. The proposed protocol outlines procedures to determine whether the samples could be safely released from high containment without sterilization or require a "hold and review" step. This article presents the central concept of the SSAP approach-comparing returned samples to the abiotic baseline. Organic molecules, which exist throughout the solar system, can have either biotic or abiotic origins. However, biotically produced organic molecules exhibit distinct complexity, distribution, and abundance characteristics that differentiate them from those formed through abiotic chemistry. The proposed protocol would examine the organic inventory of returned samples by using multiple techniques, including morphological and spectral assessments, to determine whether any signals exceed the abiotic baseline; that is, whether the organic molecular inventory could be explained solely by abiotic chemical synthesis. This approach provides a rigorous, yet feasible, safety assessment protocol by using modern techniques while minimizing sample consumption. We also identify key areas for future research and development, which include detection limits and further characterization of the martian abiotic background.

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)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.022

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstrobiologySame topicIon-surface interactions and analysisFrench-language works237,207