The next Landsat: Mission turning point?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For over fifty years, the Landsat satellite series has provided continuous and comprehensive data for monitoring changes on the Earth's terrestrial surface. Eight successive missions, carrying progressively more sophisticated sensors, with improved radiometric, geometric, and spatial characteristics, have provided an unbroken series of optical and thermal imagery, unparalleled globally. With limited lifetimes for each Landsat satellite, planning of each mission typically overlaps to ensure continuity. Commencing in 2021, planning of a Landsat-9 successor gathered user needs from across the Earth Observation (EO) community, resulting in the Landsat Next (LNext) mission design of three sun-synchronous satellites to acquire reflective and thermal wavelength observations with two to three times the temporal, spatial, and spectral resolution of previous missions. Proposed 2026 U.S. budgets have significantly reduced NASA Earth Science funding. Alternate architectures are now being investigated for Landsat Next that would only meet Landsat-9 design requirements. While this would provide observation continuity, this implies a revised Landsat Next program launched in the early 2030s with nearly 30 year old capabilities, that may acquire data with lower radiometric quality than the current on-orbit Landsat-8 and 9 missions, and that will not support the new capabilities advocated for by the EO user community. This correspondence serves to raise community awareness that the decision is pending, and outlines the observation requirements originally envisioned for LNext and how they were derived to provide context for evaluating the restructured and descoped capability now being considered. • Landsat Next design: twenty-one 10/20-m VSWIR and five 60-m TIR bands. • Three-satellite constellation, six-day global land surface revisit. • Derivation of Landsat Next observation requirements for science and applications. • Descoped mission will not meet future user needs. • Descoped mission risks less, and lower quality, data than current Landsats.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".