MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096256307

Gravitational and Space Biology 23(2) August 2010 3 MELiSSA: THE EUROPEAN PROJECT OF CLOSED LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM

2014· article· en· W7096256307 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLight effects on plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramLife support systemMemorandumSpace explorationSpace (punctuation)Anoxygenic photosynthesisKnowledge baseRobustness (evolution)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The MELiSSA (Micro-ecological life-support system) project is intended to be a tool to gain understanding of closed life-support systems, and consequently a knowledge base for European development of regenerative life-support systems for long-term manned missions (e.g. lunar base, Mars mission). The driving elements of MELiSSA are the production of food, water, and oxygen from the organic wastes of the mission (e.g., urine, CO2,). Inspired by a terrestrial “aquatic ” ecosystem, the MELiSSA process consists of five main sub-processes called compartments, from the anoxygenic thermophilic up to the photo-autrophic (e.g., higher plants). The choice of this compartmentalized structure is required by the very high level of space requirements in terms of robustness and safety. During the 20 years of the project, a very progressive and structured approach has been developed to characterize, model, and control the MELiSSA loop. This approach starts from the selection of the involved sub-processes, up to its predictive control. The project is structured on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and is managed by ESA. It involves roughly 30 organizations encompassing Europe and Canada; eleven of these organizations, called partners, have

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLight effects on plantsFrench-language works237,207