SETI Post-Detection Protocols: Progress Towards a New Version
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) SETI Committee has long provided guiding principles for responding to a potential detection of a SETI signal. The foundational Declaration of Principles Concerning Activities Following the Detection of Extraterrestrial Intelligence, first formulated in 1989, has been widely recognised by the international scientific community. A supplemental set of draft protocols addressing the possibility of a reply to an extraterrestrial signal was prepared in 1995 by the IAA SETI Permanent Committee, with both documents presented in a position paper to the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space in 2000. In keeping with the evolving landscape of SETI research, the IAA Declaration of Principles was streamlined and updated in 2010. Recognising the need for continued adaptation, the IAA SETI Committee established a Task Group in 2022 to re-examine the protocols in light of recent advances in search methodologies, the expansion of international participation in SETI, and the increasing complexity of the global information environment. The Group recognises the living document nature of the protocols, which will require ongoing refinement to remain relevant and effective in a rapidly changing world. A draft revised Declaration of Principles was presented at the IAC 2024 in Milan, and initial feedback was received from the community, particularly members of the IAA SETI Committee. Since then, we have continued to seek broader community input in a structured process, refining the proposed updates based on further discussions and consultations. A Revised Declaration of Principles, is presented here.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.126 | 0.216 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.040 |
| Open science | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.064 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".