MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7119395769

A Strategic Framework to Support Scientific Communications for Mars Sample Return Science: Overview and Status

2025· other· en· W7119395769 on OpenAlexfundno aff
R. L. Harris, T. Haltigin, M. P. Zorzano, A. W. Steele, S. Edwin, D. Beaty, Audrey Bouvier, B. L. Carrier, A. D. Czaja, Nicolas Dauphas, K. L. French, D P Glavin, L. J. Hallis, Ernst Hauber, L. E. Hays, Aurore Hützler, Gerhard Kminek, E. Sefton-Nash, L. E. Rodriguez, S.P. Schwenzer, F. Thiessen, M. T. Thorpe, K. T. Tait, M. A. Velbel, Jessica Vanhomwegen, T. Usui

Bibliographic record

Venueelib (German Aerospace Center) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Space AgencyCanadian Space AgencyUK Space AgencyJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsCornerstoneMars Exploration ProgramSample (material)Strategic planningScientific communicationStrategic communicationSustainabilityScience communication
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The joint NASA/ESA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is a cornerstone of both agencies’ long-term scientific exploration strategy that would revolutionize our understanding of the history of Mars, the Solar System, and the potential for life beyond Earth. In 2023, findings from an Independent Review Board (IRB-2) emphasized the need for clear and compelling communication of MSR’s scientific and strategic value to Congress, the scientific community, and the public [1]. In response, NASA’s Science Mission Directorate’s MSR IRB-2 Response Team (MIRT) acknowledged the critical need for strengthening and enhancing strategic communications to ensure mission success and public support [2].

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0170.009
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.009

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.321 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueelib (German Aerospace Center)French-language works237,207