A Comprehensive Plan for Development and Maintenance of a Flourishing Space Physical Science Community in Countries with Modest Population Base
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Space agencies of countries such as Canada experience particular challenges with respect to the establishment and maintenance of a flourishing space physical sciences community. The Canadian Space Agency has developed a longterm plan that will allow a relatively large number of Canadian scientists and industry partners to contribute to space physical science, and that will also provide a continual flow of flight experiments. This plan has inherent flexibility, allowing it to be adapted and used by space agencies of countries with a similar population base and resource capability as Canada. The plan can be visualized as a pyramid, with conceptual studies forming the base, and flight experiments the peak. Conceptual studies are solicited through a yearly Announcement of Opportunity (AO) that supplies grants to top-ranked proposals. Feasibility studies, which follow naturally from successfully completed conceptual studies, are solicited in the same AO. Depending on the maturity and complexity of the scientific and technical requirements for a flight experiment, a research team can submit proposals for flight experiment AOs de novo (i.e. without previous CSA funding) or after a successful feasibility study. Announcements of Opportunity for flight experiment will be offered every two years, depending on the number of successful proposals undergoing implementation. Applicants to these AOs will be able to tailor proposals to appropriate categories; i.e. proposals that have low resource (e.g. upmass, crewtime) requirements will be assessed separately from proposals that have significant resource requirements. It is expected that this AO scheme, combined with strategic support of workshops and a strong network of collaboration among international partner agencies, will allow CSA to develop and sustain a vigorous space physical science community.
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 | 0.028 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.015 |
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".