The Path Partition Conjecture is true for some generalizations of tournaments

Alan Arroyo,H. Galeana-Sánchez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2012.10.014

IF: 0.961

2013-02-06

Discrete Mathematics

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Final Report of the Mars Sample Return Science Planning Group 2 (MSPG2)

Michael A Meyer,Gerhard Kminek,David W Beaty,Brandi L Carrier,Timothy Haltigin,Lindsay E Hays,Carl B Agree,Henner Busemann,Barbara Cavalazzi,Charles S Cockell,Vinciane Debaille,Daniel P Glavin,Monica M Grady,Ernst Hauber,Aurore Hutzler,Bernard Marty,Francis M McCubbin,Lisa M Pratt,Aaron B Regberg,Alvin L Smith,Caroline L Smith,Roger E Summons,Timothy D Swindle,Kimberly T Tait,Nicholas J Tosca,Arya Udry,Tomohiro Usui,Michael A Velbel,Meenakshi Wadhwa,Frances Westall,Maria-Paz Zorzano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/AST.2021.0121

IF: 4.045

Astrobiology

Abstract:The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign must meet a series of scientific and technical achievements to be successful. While the respective engineering responsibilities to retrieve the samples have been formalized through a Memorandum of Understanding between ESA and NASA, the roles and responsibilities of the scientific elements have yet to be fully defined. In April 2020, ESA and NASA jointly chartered the MSR Science Planning Group 2 (MSPG2) to build upon previous planning efforts in defining 1) an end-to-end MSR Science Program and 2) needed functionalities and design requirements for an MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). The challenges for the first samples brought from another planet include not only maintaining and providing samples in pristine condition for study, but also maintaining biological containment until the samples meet sample safety criteria for distribution outside of biocontainment. The MSPG2 produced six reports outlining 66 findings. Abbreviated versions of the five additional high-level MSPG2 summary findings are: Summary-1. A long-term NASA/ESA MSR Science Program, along with the necessary funding and human resources, will be required to accomplish the end-to-end scientific objectives of MSR. Summary-2. MSR curation would need to be done concurrently with Biosafety Level-4 containment. This would lead to complex first-of-a-kind curation implementations and require further technology development. Summary-3. Most aspects of MSR sample science could, and should, be performed on samples deemed safe in laboratories outside of the SRF. However, other aspects of MSR sample science are both time-sensitive and sterilization-sensitive and would need to be carried out in the SRF. Summary-4. To meet the unique science, curation, and planetary protection needs of MSR, substantial analytical and sample management capabilities would be required in an SRF. Summary-5. Because of the long lead-time for SRF design, construction, and certification, it is important that preparations begin immediately, even if there is delay in the return of samples.
Science and Curation Considerations for the Design of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF)

Brandi L Carrier,David W Beaty,Aurore Hutzler,Alvin L Smith,Gerhard Kminek,Michael A Meyer,Timothy Haltigin,Lindsay E Hays,Carl B Agee,Henner Busemann,Barbara Cavalazzi,Charles S Cockell,Vinciane Debaille,Daniel P Glavin,Monica M Grady,Ernst Hauber,Bernard Marty,Francis M McCubbin,Lisa M Pratt,Aaron B Regberg,Caroline L Smith,Roger E Summons,Timothy D Swindle,Kimberly T Tait,Nicholas J Tosca,Arya Udry,Tomohiro Usui,Michael A Velbel,Meenakshi Wadhwa,Frances Westall,Maria-Paz Zorzano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/AST.2021.0110

IF: 4.045

Astrobiology

Abstract:The most important single element of the "ground system" portion of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is a facility referred to as the Sample Receiving Facility (SRF), which would need to be designed and equipped to receive the returned spacecraft, extract and open the sealed sample container, extract the samples from the sample tubes, and implement a set of evaluations and analyses of the samples. One of the main findings of the first MSR Sample Planning Group (MSPG, 2019a) states that "The scientific community, for reasons of scientific quality, cost, and timeliness, strongly prefers that as many sample-related investigations as possible be performed in PI-led laboratories outside containment." There are many scientific and technical reasons for this preference, including the ability to utilize advanced and customized instrumentation that may be difficult to reproduce inside in a biocontained facility, and the ability to allow multiple science investigators in different labs to perform similar or complementary analyses to confirm the reproducibility and accuracy of results. It is also reasonable to assume that there will be a desire for the SRF to be as efficient and economical as possible, while still enabling the objectives of MSR to be achieved. For these reasons, MSPG concluded, and MSPG2 agrees, that the SRF should be designed to accommodate only those analytical activities that could not reasonably be done in outside laboratories because they are time- or sterilization-sensitive, are necessary for the Sample Safety Assessment Protocol (SSAP), or are necessary parts of the initial sample characterization process that would allow subsamples to be effectively allocated for investigation. All of this must be accommodated in an SRF, while preserving the scientific value of the samples through maintenance of strict environmental and contamination control standards. Executive Summary The most important single element of the "ground system" portion of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is a facility referred to as the Sample Receiving Facility (SRF), which would need to be designed and equipped to enable receipt of the returned spacecraft, extraction and opening of the sealed sample container, extraction of the samples from the sample tubes, and a set of evaluations and analyses of the samples-all under strict protocols of biocontainment and contamination control. Some of the important constraints in the areas of cost and required performance have not yet been set by the necessary governmental sponsors, but it is reasonable to assume there will be a desire for the SRF to be as efficient and economical as is possible, while still enabling the objectives of MSR science to be achieved. Additionally, one of the main findings of MSR Sample Planning Group (MSPG, 2019a) states "The scientific community, for reasons of scientific quality, cost, and timeliness, strongly prefers that as many sample-related investigations as possible be performed in PI-led laboratories outside containment." There are many scientific and technical reasons for this preference, including the ability to utilize advanced and customized instrumentation that may be difficult to reproduce inside a biocontained facility. Another benefit is the ability to enable similar or complementary analyses by multiple science investigators in different laboratories, which would confirm the reproducibility and accuracy of results. For these reasons, the MSPG concluded-and the MSR Science Planning Group Phase 2 (MSPG2) agrees-that the SRF should be designed to accommodate only those analytical activities inside biocontainment that could not reasonably be done in outside laboratories because such activities are time-sensitive, sterilization-sensitive, required by the Sample Safety Assessment Protocol (SSAP), or are necessary parts of the initial sample characterization process that would allow subsamples to be effectively allocated for investigation. All activities within the SRF must be done while preserving the scientific value of the samples through maintenance of strict environmental and contamination control standards. The SRF would need to provide a unique environment that consists of both Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) equivalent containment and a very high level of contamination control. The SRF would also need to accommodate the following activities: (1)Receipt of the returned spacecraft, presumably in a sealed shipping container (2)De-integration (i.e., disassembly) and assessment of the returned system, beginning with the spacecraft exterior and ending with accessing and isolating all Mars material (gas, dust, regolith, and rock) (3)Initial sample characterization, leading to development of a sample catalog sufficient to support sample allocation (see Tait et al., 2022) (4)Science investigations necessary to complete the SSAP (see Kminek et al., 2021) (5)Certain science investigations that are both time- and sterilization-sensitive (see Tosca et al., 2022; Velbel et al., 2022) (6)A managed transition to post-SRF activities that would include analysis of samples (either sterilized or not) outside biocontainment and the transfer of some or all samples to one or more uncontained curation facilities The MSPG2 has produced a compilation of potential design requirements for the SRF, based on the list of activities noted above, that can be used in cost and schedule planning. The text of this report is meant to serve as an overview and explanation of these proposed SRF Design Requirements that have been compiled by the MSPG2 SRF Requirements Focus Group (Supplement 1). Summary of Findings FINDING SRF-1: The quality of the science that can be achieved with the MSR samples will be negatively impacted if they are not protected from contamination and inappropriate environmental conditions. A significant amount of SRF infrastructure would therefore be necessary to maintain and monitor appropriate levels of cleanliness, contamination control, and environmental conditions. FINDING SRF-2: Although most MSR sample investigations would take place outside of the SRF, the SRF needs to include significant laboratory capabilities with advanced instruments and associated sample preparation systems to enable the MSR science objectives to be successfully achieved. FINDING SRF-3: Preliminary studies of different operational scenarios should be started as soon as possible to enable analysis of the trade-offs between the cost and size of the SRF and the amount of time needed to prepare the samples for allocation and analysis. FINDING SRF-4: The ability to add additional analytical capabilities within biocontainment should be preserved to address the contingency scenario in which unsterilized material is not cleared to be analyzed outside of biocontainment. If potential evidence of martian life were to be detected in the samples, for example, it would be a high priority to conduct further investigations related to any putative lifeforms, as well as to enable other sterilization-sensitive science investigations to be conducted in biocontainment.
Preliminary Planning for Mars Sample Return (MSR) Curation Activities in a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF)

Kimberly T Tait,Francis M McCubbin,Caroline L Smith,Carl B Agee,Henner Busemann,Barbara Cavalazzi,Vinciane Debaille,Aurore Hutzler,Tomohiro Usui,Gerhard Kminek,Michael A Meyer,David W Beaty,Brandi L Carrier,Timothy Haltigin,Lindsay E Hays,Charles S Cockell,Daniel P Glavin,Monica M Grady,Ernst Hauber,Bernard Marty,Lisa M Pratt,Aaron B Regberg,Alvin L Smith,Roger E Summons,Timothy D Swindle,Nicholas J Tosca,Arya Udry,Michael A Velbel,Meenakshi Wadhwa,Frances Westall,Maria-Paz Zorzano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/AST.2021.0105

IF: 4.045

Astrobiology

Abstract:The Mars Sample Return Planning Group 2 (MSPG2) was tasked with identifying the steps that encompass all the curation activities that would happen within the MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) and any anticipated curation-related requirements. An area of specific interest is the necessary analytical instrumentation. The SRF would be a Biosafety Level-4 facility where the returned MSR flight hardware would be opened, the sample tubes accessed, and the martian sample material extracted from the tubes. Characterization of the essential attributes of each sample would be required to provide enough information to prepare a sample catalog used in guiding the preparation of sample-related proposals by the world's research community and informing decisions by the sample allocation committee. The sample catalog would be populated with data and information generated during all phases of activity, including data derived concurrent with Mars 2020 sample-collecting rover activity, sample transport to Earth, and initial sample characterization within the SRF. We conclude that initial sample characterization can best be planned as a set of three sequential phases, which we have called Pre-Basic Characterization (Pre-BC), Basic Characterization (BC), and Preliminary Examination (PE), each of which requires a certain amount of instrumentation. Data on specific samples and subsamples obtained during sample safety assessments and time-sensitive scientific investigations would also be added to the catalog. There are several areas where future work would be beneficial to prepare for the receipt of samples, which would include the design of a sample tube isolation chamber and a strategy for opening the sample tubes and removing dust from the tube exteriors. Executive Summary All material collected from Mars (gases, dust, rock, regolith) would need to be carefully handled, stored, and analyzed following Earth return to minimize the alteration or contamination that could occur on Earth and maximize the scientific information that can be attained from the samples now and into the future. A Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) is where the Earth Entry System (EES) would be opened and the sample tubes opened and processed after they land on Earth. Samples should be accessible for research in biocontainment for time-sensitive studies and eventually, when deemed safe for release after sterilization or biohazard assessment, should be transferred out of biocontainment for allocation to scientific investigators in outside laboratories. There are two main mechanisms for allocation of samples outside the SRF: 1) Wait until the implementation of the Sample Safety Assessment Protocol (Planetary Protection) results concludes that the samples are non-hazardous, 2) Render splits of the samples non-hazardous by means of sterilization. To make these samples accessible, a series of observations and analytical measurements need to be completed to produce a sample catalog for the scientific community. Specialist members of the Mars Sample Return Planning Group Phase 2 (MSPG2), referred to here as the Curation Focus Group, have identified four curation goals that encompass all of the activities within the SRF: 1.Documentation of the state of the sample tubes and their contents prior to opening, 2.Inventory and tracking of the mass of each sample, 3.Preliminary assessment of lithology and any macroscopic forms of heterogeneity (on all the samples, non-invasive, in pristine isolators), 4.Sufficient characterization of the essential attributes of each sample to prepare a sample catalog and respond to requests by the sample allocation committee (partial samples, invasive, outside of pristine isolators). The sample catalog will provide data for the scientific community to make informed requests for samples for scientific investigations and for the approval of allocations of appropriate samples to satisfy these requests. The sample catalog would be populated with data and information generated during all phases of activity, including data derived from the landed Mars 2020 mission, during sample collection and transport to Earth, and reception within the Sample Receiving Facility. Data on specific samples and subsamples would also be generated during curation activities carried out within the Sample Receiving Facility and during sample safety assessments, time-sensitive studies, and a series of initial sample characterization steps we refer to as Pre-Basic Characterization (Pre-BC), Basic Characterization (BC), and Preliminary Examination (PE) phases. A significant portion of the Curation Focus Group's efforts was to determine which instrumentation would be required to produce a sample catalog for the scientific community and how and when certain instrumentation should be used. The goal is to provide enough information for the PIs to request material for their studies but to avoid facilitating studies that target scientific research that is better left to peer-reviewed competitive processes. We reviewed the proposed scientific objectives of the International MSR Objectives and Samples Team (iMOST) (Beaty et al., 2019) to make sure that the instrumentation suggested is sufficient to cover these key science planning questions (Table 1; Section S-6). It was determined that for Pre-Basic Characterization, two instruments are required, a Magnetometer (see Section S-1.1) and an X-ray Computed Tomography scanner (XCT see Section S-1.2). For Basic Characterization, there are four instruments that are considered necessary, which are analytical balance(s) (see Section S-2.1), binocular microscopes (see Section S-2.2), and multispectral imaging and hyperspectral scanning systems (see Section S-2.3). Then in Preliminary Examination, there is a set of instruments that should be available for generating more detailed information for the sample catalog. These are a Variable Pressure-Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope (VP-FE-SEM see Section S-3.1), Confocal Raman spectrometer (see Section S-3.2), Deep UV Fluorescence (see Section S-3.3), a Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer (see Section S-3.4), a Micro X-ray Diffractometer (see Section S-3.5), X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (see Section S-3.6), and Petrographic and Stereo Microscope (see Section S-3.7). All instruments are summarized in Table 1. Finally, our Curation Focus Group has outlined several specific findings for sample curation within the SRF to complete the sample catalog prior to sample distribution and made several recommendations for future work (summarized in Section 8.1) to build upon the efforts that generated this report. List of Findings MAJOR FINDING C-1: The initial sample characterization in the Sample Receiving Facility of the MSR samples can be broken down into three stages for simplicity as follows: Pre-Basic Characterization (Pre-BC), Basic Characterization (BC), and Preliminary Examination (PE). While the whole collection would be assessed through Pre-BC and BC, only subsets of samples would be used during the PE phase. FINDING C-2: Immediately after Earth landing, the spacecraft would be recovered and placed in a container designed to control and stabilize its physical conditions. The optimum temperature (Toptimum) of the sample tubes during transport to the Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) should be the same as the operating temperature of the SRF to avoid unnecessary temperature shock. FINDING C-3: The Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) should operate at room temperature (∼15-25°C), and the samples should be held at this temperature through all steps of initial sample characterization, with the option for cold storage of subsamples available in the SRF when needed. MAJOR FINDING C-4: Measurements on all the sample tubes before they are opened are essential to conduct as the samples could be compromised upon opening of the tubes. This step is called Pre-Basic Characterization (Pre-BC). These are measurements that would inform how the tubes are opened, processed, and subsampled during Basic Characterization (BC). MAJOR FINDING C-5: Careful collection and storage of the serendipitous dust on the outside of the sample tubes is a critical step in the curation process in the Sample Receiving Facility. The dust collected is a valuable resource to the scientific community. MAJOR FINDING C-6: Careful collection and storage of the unaltered and unfractionated headspace gas collected from the sample tubes is a critical step in the curation process in the Sample Receiving Facility. The gas collected is a valuable resource to the scientific community. FINDING C-7: To minimize the interaction of Earth atmospheric gases and gases that are in the sealed sample tubes, once the dust is removed from the exterior of the sample tubes, they should be placed into individual sample tube isolation chambers (STIC) as quickly as possible. FINDING C-8: There are compelling reasons to perform penetrative 3D imaging prior to opening the sample tubes. A laboratory-based X-ray Computed Tomography scanner is the best technique to use and the least damaging to organics of the penetrative imaging options considered. MAJOR FINDING C-9: Measurements on all the samples once the sample tubes are opened within the pristine isolators are essential to make initial macroscopic observations such as weighing, photographing, and optical observations. The first step to this stage is removal and collection of the headspace gas, which then starts the clock for time-sensitive measurements. This step is called Basic Characterization (BC). FINDING C-10: To avoid cross contamination between samples, it is recommended that, for processing through the isolators, the samples are organized into groups that have like properties. Given what we know about the geology of Jezero Crater, a reasonable starting assumption is five such groups. MAJOR FINDING C-11: Assuming that sample processing rates are reasonable and the samples are organized into five sets for cross contamination avoidance purposes, at least twelve pristine isolators are required to perform Basic Characterization on the MSR samples. This total would increase by two for each additional distinct processing environment. MAJOR FINDING C-12: More advanced measurements on subsamples, beyond those included in BC, are essential for the allocation of material to the scientific community for investigation, including some measurements that can make irreversible changes to the samples. These types of measurements take place during Preliminary Examination (PE). FINDING C-13: The output of the initial sample characterization, and a key function of the curation activities within the Sample Receiving Facility, is to produce a sample catalog that would provide relevant information on the samples' physical and mineralogical/chemical characteristics (derived from the Pre-Basic Characterization, Basic Characterization, and Preliminary Examination investigations), sample safety assessments, time-sensitive studies, and information derived from mission operations to enable allocation of the most appropriate materials to the scientific community. FINDING C-14: A staffing model for curation activities, including technical support and informatics/ documentation support, should be developed (as part of ongoing Sample Receiving Facility development) to ensure that the Sample Receiving Facility is staffed appropriately to support sample curation activities. FINDING C-15: To reduce the risk of catastrophic loss of samples curated in a single facility up to, and including, decadal timescales, the sample collection should be split-once it is possible to do so-and housed in more than one location for the purpose of maximizing the long-term safety of the collection.
The Scientific Importance of Returning Airfall Dust as a Part of Mars Sample Return (MSR)

Monica M Grady,Roger E Summons,Timothy D Swindle,Frances Westall,Gerhard Kminek,Michael A Meyer,David W Beaty,Brandi L Carrier,Timothy Haltigin,Lindsay E Hays,Carl B Agee,Henner Busemann,Barbara Cavalazzi,Charles S Cockell,Vinciane Debaille,Daniel P Glavin,Ernst Hauber,Aurore Hutzler,Bernard Marty,Francis M McCubbin,Lisa M Pratt,Aaron B Regberg,Alvin L Smith,Caroline L Smith,Kimberly T Tait,Nicholas J Tosca,Arya Udry,Tomohiro Usui,Michael A Velbel,Meenakshi Wadhwa,Maria-Paz Zorzano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/AST.2021.0111

IF: 4.045

Astrobiology

Abstract:Dust transported in the martian atmosphere is of intrinsic scientific interest and has relevance for the planning of human missions in the future. The MSR Campaign, as currently designed, presents an important opportunity to return serendipitous, airfall dust. The tubes containing samples collected by the Perseverance rover would be placed in cache depots on the martian surface perhaps as early as 2023-24 for recovery by a subsequent mission no earlier than 2028-29, and possibly as late as 2030-31. Thus, the sample tube surfaces could passively collect dust for multiple years. This dust is deemed to be exceptionally valuable as it would inform our knowledge and understanding of Mars' global mineralogy, surface processes, surface-atmosphere interactions, and atmospheric circulation. Preliminary calculations suggest that the total mass of such dust on a full set of tubes could be as much as 100 mg and, therefore, sufficient for many types of laboratory analyses. Two planning steps would optimize our ability to take advantage of this opportunity: (1) the dust-covered sample tubes should be loaded into the Orbiting Sample container (OS) with minimal cleaning and (2) the capability to recover this dust early in the workflow within an MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) would need to be established. A further opportunity to advance dust/atmospheric science using MSR, depending upon the design of the MSR Campaign elements, may lie with direct sampling and the return of airborne dust. Summary of Findings FINDING D-1: An accumulation of airfall dust would be an unavoidable consequence of leaving M2020 sample tubes cached and exposed on the surface of Mars. Detailed laboratory analyses of this material would yield new knowledge concerning surface-atmosphere interactions that operate on a global scale, as well as provide input to planning for the future robotic and human exploration of Mars. FINDING D-2: The detailed information that is possible from analysis of airfall dust can only be obtained by investigation in Earth laboratories, and thus this is an important corollary aspect of MSR. The same information cannot be obtained from orbit, from in situ analyses, or from analyses of samples drilled from single locations. FINDING D-3: Given that at least some martian dust would be on the exterior surfaces of any sample tubes returned to Earth, the capability to receive and curate dust in an MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) is essential. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The fact that any sample tubes cached on the martian surface would accumulate some quantity of martian airfall dust presents a low-cost scientifically valuable opportunity. Some of this dust would inadvertently be knocked off as part of tube manipulation operations, but any dust possible should be loaded into the OS along with the sample tubes. This dust should be captured in an SRF and made available for detailed scientific analysis.
The Mars Sample Return Project

W J O'Neil,C Cazaux

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0094-5765(00)00085-0

Abstract:The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Project is underway. A 2003 mission to be launched on a Delta III Class vehicle and a 2005 mission launched on an Ariane 5 will culminate in carefully selected Mars samples arriving on Earth in 2008. NASA is the lead agency and will provide the Mars landed elements, namely, landers, rovers, and Mars ascent vehicles (MAVs). The French Space Agency CNES is the largest international partner and will provide for the joint NASA/CNES 2005 Mission the Ariane 5 launch and the Earth Return Mars Orbiter that will capture the sample canisters from the Mars parking orbits the MAVs place them in. The sample canisters will be returned to Earth aboard the CNES Orbiter in the Earth Entry Vehicles provided by NASA. Other national space agencies are also expected to participate in substantial roles. Italy is planning to provide a drill that will operate from the Landers to provide subsurface samples. Other experiments in addition to the MSR payload will also be carried on the Landers. This paper will present the current status of the design of the MSR missions and flight articles.
Immunologic aspects of lepromatous leprosy with special reference to the study of antibodies.

K. Saha,M. Mittal

1972-07-01

International Journal of Leprosy and Other Mycobacterial Diseases

Abstract:The role of immunity in leprosy has attracted great interest. Studies of immune mechanisms in patients with lepromatous leprosy. have indicated that these patients suffer not only from hyporeactive state of cell-mediated immune responses (20), but also from hyperreactivity of antibodymediated immune mechanisms (6). The latter findings are based on tests which include complement fixation, hemagglutination, electrophoresis, precipitation and immunofluorescence, together with a variety of antigens not from lepromas, but also from Mycobacterium tuberculosis and other Actinomycetales. In view of these obs~r vations, a study of antibodies along With immunoglobulins and the rheumatoid factor has been undertaken in patients with lepromatous leprosy and the immunogenesis of the findings are discussed.
Conceptual Design of Mars Sample Return Mission Using Solar Montgolfieres

Malaya Kumar Biswal M,Ramesh Naidu Annavarapu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.02780

2021-03-22

Space Physics

Abstract:Space agencies have been incessantly working to propose a sustainable architecture for human Mars mission. But, before proceeding to a giant leap and accomplishing those mission intent, it is significant to know the extent of possibility to expand terrestrial species on the vast red planet. Decades of scientific exploration and experimentation through planetary landers and rovers showed uncertain and unsatisfactory results to determine the possibility of life on Mars. Consequently, the technological limitation has impeded to perform in-situ experimentation and analysis on the surface. Therefore, we require soil samples through Mars sample return vehicles for superior analysis in our ground-based laboratories or on-orbit analysis aboard International Space Station from the aspect of planetary protection policy. Sampling analysis either in ground or orbit will report the presence of fundamental constituents to harbor life. To effectuate this intent, we have proposed a unique sample return architecture integrated with large solar Montgolfier. Here, we deploy parachute and retro propulsion thrusters to deliver sample return vehicles on to the surface and systematic ascend with the aid of solar Montgolfier to propel the MSRV out of Mars atmosphere. Subsequently, the MSRV effectuates orbital rendezvous with orbiter for the refueling process and safe return. The proposed concept is cheap, robust and simple as compared to the current state of MSR architectures ultimately minimizing the technological necessities. It also detains backup plans that were found to be nowhere presented in any of sample return strategies. Further, we have extended our discussion to comprehensively analyze entire MSR architecture with our concept for mission feasibility.
MEP (Mars Environment Package): toward a package for studying environmental conditions at the surface of Mars from future lander/rover missions

E Chassefière,J-L Bertaux,J-J Berthelier,M Cabane,V Ciarletti,G Durry,F Forget,M Hamelin,F Leblanc,M Menvielle,M Gerasimov,O Korablev,S Linkin,G Managadze,A Jambon,G Manhès,Ph Lognonné,P Agrinier,P Cartigny,D Giardini,T Pike,W Kofman,A Herique,P Coll,A Person,F Costard,Ph Sarda,Ph Paillou,M Chaussidon,B Marty,F Robert,S Maurice,M Blanc,C d'Uston,J-Ch Sabroux,J-F Pineau,P Rochette

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2003.08.078

Abstract:In view to prepare Mars human exploration, it is necessary to promote and lead, at the international level, a highly interdisciplinary program, involving specialists of geochemistry, geophysics, atmospheric science, space weather, and biology. The goal of this program will be to elaborate concepts of individual instruments, then of integrated instrumental packages, able to collect exhaustive data sets of environmental parameters from future landers and rovers of Mars, and to favour the conditions of their implementation. Such a program is one of the most urgent need for preparing human exploration, in order to develop mitigation strategies aimed at ensuring the safety of human explorers, and minimizing risk for surface operations. A few main areas of investigation may be listed: particle and radiation environment, chemical composition of atmosphere, meteorology, chemical composition of dust, surface and subsurface material, water in the subsurface, physical properties of the soil, search for an hypothesized microbial activity, characterization of radio-electric properties of the Martian ionosphere. Scientists at the origin of the present paper, already involved at a high degree of responsibility in several Mars missions, and actively preparing in situ instrumentation for future landed platforms (Netlander--now cancelled, MSL-09), express their readiness to participate in both ESA/AURORA and NASA programs of Mars human exploration. They think that the formation of a Mars Environment working group at ESA, in the course of the AURORA definition phase, could act positively in favour of the program, by increasing its scientific cross-section and making it still more focused on human exploration.
Mission Architecture Using the SpaceX Starship Vehicle to Enable a Sustained Human Presence on Mars

Jennifer L. Heldmann,Margarita M. Marinova,Darlene S.S. Lim,David Wilson,Peter Carrato,Keith Kennedy,Ann Esbeck,Tony Anthony Colaprete,Richard C. Elphic,Janine Captain,Kris Zacny,Leo Stolov,Boleslaw Mellerowicz,Joseph Palmowski,Ali M. Bramson,Nathaniel Putzig,Gareth Morgan,Hanna Sizemore,Josh Coyan,Rick C. Elphic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/space.2020.0058

2021-12-02

New Space

Abstract:A main goal of human space exploration is to develop humanity into a multi-planet species where civilization extends beyond planet Earth. Establishing a self-sustaining human presence on Mars is key to achieving this goal. In situ resource utilization (ISRU) on Mars is a critical component to enabling humans on Mars to both establish long-term outposts and become self-reliant. This article focuses on a mission architecture using the SpaceX Starship as cargo and crew vehicles for the journey to Mars. The first Starships flown to Mars will be uncrewed and will provide unprecedented opportunities to deliver ∼100 metric tons of cargo to the martian surface per mission and conduct robotic precursor work to enable a sustained and self-reliant human presence on Mars. We propose that the highest priority activities for early uncrewed Starships include pre-placement of supplies, developing infrastructure, testing of key technologies, and conducting resource prospecting to map and characterize water ice for future ISRU purposes.

English Else
In Situ Geochronology for the Next Decade: Mission Designs for the Moon, Mars, and Vesta

Barbara A. Cohen,Kelsey E. Young,Nicolle E. B. Zellner,Kris Zacny,R. Aileen Yingst,Ryan N. Watkins,Richard Warwick,Sarah N. Valencia,Timothy D. Swindle,Stuart J. Robbins,Noah E. Petro,Anthony Nicoletti,Daniel P. Moriarty,Richard Lynch,Stephen J. Indyk,Juliane Gross,Jennifer A. Grier,John A. Grant,Amani Ginyard,Caleb I. Fassett,Kenneth A. Farley,Benjamin J. Farcy,Bethany L. Ehlmann,M. Darby Dyar,Gerard Daelemans,Natalie M. Curran,Carolyn H. van der Bogert,Ricardo D. Arevalo Jr,F. Scott Anderson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2101.01131

2021-01-05

Abstract:Geochronology, or determination of absolute ages for geologic events, underpins many inquiries into the formation and evolution of planets and our Solar System. Absolute ages of ancient and recent magmatic products provide strong constraints on the dynamics of magma oceans and crustal formation, as well as the longevity and evolution of interior heat engines and distinct mantle/crustal source regions. Absolute dating also relates habitability markers to the timescale of evolution of life on Earth. However, the number of geochronologically-significant terrains across the inner Solar System far exceeds our ability to conduct sample return from all of them. In preparation for the upcoming Decadal Survey, our team formulated a set of medium-class (New Frontiers) mission concepts to three different locations (the Moon, Mars, and Vesta) where sites that record Solar System bombardment, magmatism, and/or habitability are uniquely preserved and accessible. We developed a notional payload to directly date planetary surfaces, consisting of two instruments capable of measuring radiometric ages in situ, an imaging spectrometer, optical cameras to provide site geologic context and sample characterization, a trace element analyzer to augment sample contextualization, and a sample acquisition and handling system. Landers carrying this payload to the Moon, Mars, and Vesta would likely fit into the New Frontiers cost cap in our study (~$1B). A mission of this type would provide crucial constraints on planetary history while also enabling a broad suite of investigations such as basic geologic characterization, geomorphologic analysis, ground truth for remote sensing analyses, analyses of major, minor, trace, and volatile elements, atmospheric and other long-lived monitoring, organic molecule analyses, and soil and geotechnical properties.

Earth and Planetary Astrophysics,Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics
Future instruments and sustainable outposts for deep space, Moon and Mars: Highlights and lessons from geologists supporting Apollo astronauts

James W. Head,David R Scott

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/epsc2021-849

2021-07-22

Abstract:A fundamental goal of international human and robotic space exploration is to establish human outposts and bases on the Moon and Mars.&#160; We seek to provide a planetary science perspective on lessons learned from the Apollo Lunar Exploration Program. 1) Why?: What is the legacy, the long-term impact of our efforts? Apollo revealed the Earth as a planet, showed the inextricable links of the Earth-Moon system, and made the Solar System our neighborhood. We now ask: What are our origins and where are we heading?: We seek to understand the origin and evolution of the Moon, the Moon&#8217;s links to the earliest Earth history, and its lessons for exploration and understanding of Mars. These perspectives impel us to learn the lessons of off-Earth, long-term, long-distance resupply and self-sustaining presence, in order to prepare for the exploration of Mars. 2) Where?: The combination of Transformative Lunar Science (TLS) questions [1] and exploration operational requirements compel us to explore the South Polar Region (SPR) of the Moon. The scientific goals are clear: 1) What is the origin, nature and abundance of polar volatile deposits and what do they tell us about internal/external sources and volatile history? [2-3] 2) What is the nature/composition/age of the South Pole-Aitken basin, and how does this inform us about lunar interior/chronology/bombardment history, and early Solar System dynamics? [4-5] The scientific objectives are: 1) explore, document/sample volatile deposits in permanently shadowed and stratigraphically related regions. 2) explore/document/sample/date SPA ejecta/pre-SPA crustal materials.&#160; Exploration operational goals/objectives are clear: 1) Define regions that optimize realization of scientific goals/objectives. 2) Define regions of continuous/near-continuous solar illumination to provide power to survive lunar night, establish long-term presence. 3) Explore SPR to establish the nature/abundance/mode of occurrence/&#8220;grade&#8221; of candidate volatile deposits. 4) Characterize surface physical properties/trafficability in order to optimize scientific/operational activities. 5) Prepare for dedicated human/robotic exploration missions to other parts of the Moon and Mars. 6) Test nascent technologies required for sustained human Moon/Mars presence (habitation/energy storage/radiation protection/ISRU). 3) How?: Necessary is the development of a conceptual/operational framework built on a firm foundation of existing knowledge and data, and inclusion/optimization of new ideas/technologies. This permits us to continue the exploration to the next logical stages following the remarkably successful Apollo Lunar Exploration Program and multiple followon orbital/surface robotic missions. What are foundation pillars? a) Science and Engineering Synergism (SES): Apollo was successful because of the shoulder-to-shoulder engineer-scientist work culture that developed, and enabled longer-duration stay times and EVAs, significant mobility, additional equipment and experiments, and significantly greater sample return. SES requires concentrated/dedicated effort, but the rewards are clear, essential and synergistic.&#160; SES maps out into operations at all levels of mission planning and execution. b) Human-Robotic Partnerships: Exploration is not a technique contest, but a partnership. The US sent 21 robotic missions prior to Apollo 11. The key to continual success lies in developing an architecture that complements and optimizes robotic and human capabilities.&#160; c) Exploration Guidelines: Define human and robotic strengths and weaknesses, and optimize exploration plans. Longer-term stays mean both increased interactions with Earth and exploration independence of the Astronauts. Avoid &#8220;creeping determinism&#8221; [6], and encourage the Apollo T3 approach (Train &#8216;em/Trust &#8216;em/Turn &#8216;em loose). Science and operational goals and objectives require exploration of broad areas: build in extensive Apollo LRV-like mobility. New remote-sensing technologies will enable more in situ characterization, sample analysis and selection but Earth laboratory technology advances will always outpace in situ analysis. Build in significant sample return mass from the beginning. d) Exploration Architectures: Individual missions are viewed as integrated elements in an operational strategy/architecture that is designed to accomplish the overarching goals. Candidate elements: I) Precursor (What do we need to know before we send humans?). II) Context (What are robotic mission requirements for final landing site selection/regional context for results?). III) Infrastructure/Operations (What specific robotic capabilities are required to optimize human scientific exploration performance?). IV) Interpolation (How do we use robotic missions to interpolate between human traverses?). V) Extrapolation (How do we use robotic missions to extrapolate beyond the human exploration radius?). VI) Progeny (What targeted robotic successor missions might be sent to the region to follow up on discoveries during exploration and from post-campaign analysis?). The NASA Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) Program complements the Artemis Program in this manner. e) Flexibility and Adaptability: Science is the exploration of the unknown. Site Selection/Traverse Planning Guidelines: Landing site selection always involves a balance of mission goals and objectives, and landing/operation safety/success. Science and Engineering Synergism (SES) is the key to this success as demonstrated during Apollo, and should be implemented throughout the exploration architecture. The same principles apply to traverse planning. SES ensures that science/engineering data needed for key decisions will be available and optimizes decisions. SES also optimizes the long-term goal of lunar base siting: for example, Mons Malapert, an inviting target for base siting due to favorable illumination/power, is difficult to traverse with Lunokhod and Apollo LRV-type vehicles [7]. Surface Operations: New instrumentation and technologies will significantly enhance exploration planning and accomplishment of goals. A multispectral laser reflectometer on the surface can confirm the presence of water ice and its location and distribution on scales relevant to human operations (cm to m), and be used to direct sampling and ISRU efforts undertaken by Artemis astronauts, a capability [9] highly complementary to orbital approaches. The parallel operations of robotic rovers, CLPS payload deliveries, and human activities will require continuous engineering and science operations/analysis centers on Earth. Lessons from the ISS should be incorporated, while also recognizing the human exploration capabilities of the Astronauts on the Moon [6].&#160; References: 1. Pieters et al. (2018)*; 2. Zuber et al (2012) Nature 486, 378; 3. Li et al. (2019) PNAS 115, 8907; 4. Moriarty & Pieters (2018) JGR 123, 729; 5. Ivanov et al. (2018) PSS 162, 190; 6. Krikalev et al. (2010) Acta Astro. 66, 70; 7. Mazarico et al., 2020, LSSW; 8. Baslievsky et al. (2019) SSR 53, 383; 9. Cremons et al. (2020) LSSW. *http://www.planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/5480.pdf
NASA's new Mars Exploration Program: the trajectory of knowledge

J B Garvin,O Figueroa,F M Naderi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/153110701753593847

IF: 4.045

Astrobiology

Abstract:NASA's newly restructured Mars Exploration Program (MEP) is finally on the way to Mars with the successful April 7 launch of the 2001 Mars Odyssey Orbiter. In addition, the announcement by the Bush Administration that the exploration of Mars will be a priority within NASA's Office of Space Science further cements the first decade of the new millennium as one of the major thrusts to understand the "new" Mars. Over the course of the past year and a half, an integrated team of managers, scientists, and engineers has crafted a revamped MEP to respond to the scientific as well as management and resource challenges associated with deep space exploration of the Red Planet. This article describes the new program from the perspective of its guiding philosophies, major events, and scientific strategy. It is intended to serve as a roadmap to the next 10-15 years of Mars exploration from the NASA viewpoint. [For further details, see the Mars Exploration Program web site (URL): http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov]. The new MEP will certainly evolve in response to discoveries, to successes, and potentially to setbacks as well. However, the design of the restructured strategy is attentive to risks, and a major attempt to instill resiliency in the program has been adopted. Mars beckons, and the next decade of exploration should provide the impetus for a follow-on decade in which multiple sample returns and other major program directions are executed. Ultimately the vision to consider the first human scientific expeditions to the Red Planet will be enabled. By the end of the first decade of this program, we may know where and how to look for the elusive clues associated with a possible martian biological record, if any was every preserved, even if only as "chemical fossils."
Submandibular salivary gland weight increase by administration of isoproterenol to rats.

H. Wells

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/AJPLEGACY.1962.202.3.425

1962-03-01

Abstract:Administration of isoproterenol, like amputation of lower incisor teeth, resulted in a marked increase in both the fresh and dry weights of the submandibular salivary glands of rats. There was a linear relationship between the percent increase in gland weight and the dose of isoproterenol between 10 and 160 mg/kg/day. Ten days after cessation of isoproterenol administration, the weight of the enlarged glands had receded to control levels. Although prior unilateral extirpation of the superior cervical ganglion inhibited the response to incisor amputation of the submandibular gland on the operated side, both glands enlarged to the same extent following administration of isoproterenol. When isoproterenol administration was combined with amputation of the incisors, the effects on gland weight were additive.
Exoplanet Exploration Program Analysis Group (ExoPAG) Report to Paul Hertz Regarding Large Mission Concepts to Study for the 2020 Decadal Survey

B. Scott Gaudi,Eric Agol,Daniel Apai,Eduardo Bendek,Alan Boss,James B. Breckinridge,David R. Ciardi,Nicolas B. Cowan,William C. Danchi,Shawn Domagal-Goldman,Jonathan J. Fortney,Thomas P. Greene,Lisa Kaltenegger,James F. Kasting,David T. Leisawitz,Alain Leger,Charles F. Lille,Douglas P. Lisman,Amy S. Lo,Fabian Malbet,Avi M. Mandell,Victoria S. Meadows,Bertrand Mennesson,Bijan Nemati,Peter P. Plavchan,Stephen A. Rinehart,Aki Roberge,Eugene Serabyn,Stuart B. Shaklan,Michael Shao,Karl R. Stapelfeldt,Christopher C. Stark,Mark Swain,Stuart F. Taylor,Margaret C. Turnbull,Neal J. Turner,Slava G. Turyshev,Stephen C. Unwin,Lucianne M. Walkowicz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1601.00008

2016-01-01

Abstract:This is a joint summary of the reports from the three Astrophysics Program Analysis Groups (PAGs) in response to the "Planning for the 2020 Decadal Survey" charge given by the Astrophysics Division Director Paul Hertz. This joint executive summary contains points of consensus across all three PAGs. Additional findings specific to the individual PAGs are reported separately in the individual reports. The PAGs concur that all four large mission concepts identified in the white paper as candidates for maturation prior to the 2020 Decadal Survey should be studied in detail. These include the Far-IR Surveyor, the Habitable-Exoplanet Imaging Mission, the UV/Optical/IR Surveyor, and the X-ray Surveyor. This finding is predicated upon assumptions outlined in the white paper and subsequent charge, namely that 1) major development of future large flagship missions under consideration are to follow the implementation phases of JWST and WFIRST; 2) NASA will partner with the European Space Agency on its L3 Gravitational Wave Surveyor; 3) the Inflation Probe be classified as a probe-class mission to be developed according to the 2010 Decadal Survey report. If these key assumptions were to change, this PAG finding would need to be re-evaluated. The PAGs find that there is strong community support for the second phase of this activity - maturation of the four proposed mission concepts via Science and Technology Definition Teams (STDTs). The PAGs find that there is strong consensus that all of the STDTs contain broad and interdisciplinary representation of the science community. Finally, the PAGs find that there is community support for a line of Probe-class missions within the Astrophysics mission portfolio (condensed).

Earth and Planetary Astrophysics,Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics
Somatostatin Interneurons Control a Key Component of Mismatch Negativity in Mouse Visual Cortex.

Jordan P. Hamm,R. Yuste

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.06.037

IF: 8.8

2016-07-19

Cell Reports

Abstract:
Planetary Protection Implementation and Verification Approach for the Mars 2020 Mission

Moogega Cooper,Fei Chen,Lisa Guan,Akemi A. Hinzer,Gayane Kazarians,Cynthia Ly,Timothy B. Shirey,Kristina Stott

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2022.0046

IF: 4.045

2023-07-07

Astrobiology

Abstract:The Mars 2020 Flight System comprises a Cruise Stage; Aeroshell; Entry, Descent, and Landing system; Perseverance rover; and the Ingenuity helicopter. The Perseverance rover was successfully delivered to Jezero Crater on February 18, 2021. Among its science objectives, Perseverance is meant to search for rocks that are capable of preserving chemical traces of ancient life, if it existed, and to core and cache rock and regolith samples. The Perseverance rover is gathering samples for potential return to Earth as part of a Mars Sample Return campaign. Thus, controlling the presence of Earth-sourced biological contamination is important to protect the integrity of the scientific results as well as to comply with international treaty and NASA requirements governing Planetary Protection prior to launch. An unprecedented campaign of sampling and environmental monitoring occurred, which resulted in over 16,000 biological samples collected throughout spacecraft assembly. Engineering design, microbial reduction measures, monitoring, and process controls enabled the mission to limit the total spore bioburden to 3.73 × 10 5 spores, which provided 25.4% margin against the required limit. Furthermore, the total spore bioburden of all landed hardware was 3.86 × 10 4 , which provided 87% margin against the required limit. This manuscript outlines the Planetary Protection implementation approach and verification methodologies applied to the Mars 2020 flight system and its surrounding environments.

astronomy & astrophysics,biology,geosciences, multidisciplinary
Report of the 6 th (Virtual) Meeting on the Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Human Missions to Mars June 1-2, 2022

J. Andy Spry,Bette Siegel,Gerhard Kminek,Amy Baker,Esther Beltran,Michelle Courtney,Peter Doran,Jennifer Heldmann,Aaron Regberg,Petra Rettberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lssr.2024.02.001

IF: 2.73

2024-02-21

Life Sciences in Space Research

Abstract:This paper reports the sixth in a series of meetings held under the auspices of COSPAR (with space agencies support) to identify, refine and prioritize the knowledge gaps that need to be addressed for planetary protection for crewed missions to Mars, as well as to describe where and how needed data can be obtained. This approach is consistent with current scientific understanding and COSPAR policy, that the presence of a biological hazard in Martian material cannot be ruled out, and appropriate mitigations need to be in place. The workshops in the series were intentionally organized to obtain a diverse set of inputs from subject matter experts across a range of expertise on conduct of a potential future crewed Mars exploration mission, identifying and leveraging precursor ground, cis-lunar crewed and Mars robotic activities that can be used to close knowledge gaps. The knowledge gaps addressed by this meeting series fall into three major themes: 1. Microbial and human health monitoring; 2. Technology and operations for biological contamination control, and; 3. Natural transport of biological contamination on Mars. This report describes the findings of the 2022 meeting, which focused on measures needed to protect the crew and the returning Mars samples during the mission, both on the Martian surface and during the return to Earth. Much of this approach to crewed exploration is well aligned with the Principles and Guidelines for Human Missions to Mars described in section 9.3 of the current (2021) COSPAR policy, in terms of goals and intent. There were three specific recommendations: • The crew should be considered as a unit, meaning if one individual gets sick it will be impractical for them to be isolated from the other crew member(s) (this differs from the current COSPAR Planetary Protection Policy language). • Pristine life detection/subsurface samples should be kept separate from the crew during the return trip, both to keep them pristine and to protect the crew. (If there are time sensitive measurement that need to be made during the return trip they could be made on a dedicated non-pristine set of samples) • An approach to break the chain of contact 1 between Mars and the Earth is still needed to protect the broader biosphere, even if crew exposed on Mars appear unharmed.

biology,astronomy & astrophysics
Mercury Lander: Planetary Mission Concept Study for the 2023-2032 Decadal Survey

Carolyn M. Ernst,Sanae Kubota,Nancy Chabot,Rachel Klima,Gabe Rogers,Paul Byrne,Kathleen E. Vander Kaaden,Sebastien Besse,David Blewett,Brett Denevi,Sander Goossens,Stephen Indyk,Noam Izenberg,Catherine Johnson,Lauren Jozwiak,Haje Korth,Scott Murchie,Patrick Peplowski,Jim Raines,Elizabeth Rampe,Michelle Thompson,Steven A. Hauck II,Ronald J. Vervack Jr.,Ralph McNutt Jr.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06795

2021-07-14

Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics

Abstract:As an end-member of terrestrial planet formation, Mercury holds unique clues about the original distribution of elements in the earliest stages of solar system development and how planets and exoplanets form and evolve in close proximity to their host stars. This Mercury Lander mission concept enables in situ surface measurements that address several fundamental science questions raised by MESSENGER's pioneering exploration of Mercury. Such measurements are needed to understand Mercury's unique mineralogy and geochemistry; to characterize the proportionally massive core's structure; to measure the planet's active and ancient magnetic fields at the surface; to investigate the processes that alter the surface and produce the exosphere; and to provide ground truth for current and future remote datasets. NASA's Planetary Mission Concept Studies program awarded this study to evaluate the feasibility of accomplishing transformative science through a New-Frontiers-class, landed mission to Mercury in the next decade. The resulting mission concept achieves one full Mercury year (~88 Earth days) of surface operations with an ambitious, high-heritage, landed science payload, corresponding well with the New Frontiers mission framework. The 11-instrument science payload is delivered to a landing site within Mercury's widely distributed low-reflectance material, and addresses science goals and objectives encompassing geochemistry, geophysics, the Mercury space environment, and surface geology. This mission concept is meant to be representative of any scientific landed mission to Mercury; alternate payload implementations and landing locations would be viable and compelling for a future landed Mercury mission.
Enabling Astronaut Self-Scheduling using a Robust Advanced Modelling and Scheduling system: an assessment during a Mars analogue mission

Michael Saint-Guillain,Jean Vanderdonckt,Nicolas Burny,Vladimir Pletser,Tiago Vaquero,Steve Chien,Alexander Karl,Jessica Marquez,John Karasinski,Cyril Wain,Audrey Comein,Ignacio S. Casla,Jean Jacobs,Julien Meert,Cheyenne Chamart,Sirga Drouet,Julie Manon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.08248

2023-01-15

Abstract:Human long duration exploration missions (LDEMs) raise a number of technological challenges. This paper addresses the question of the crew autonomy: as the distances increase, the communication delays and constraints tend to prevent the astronauts from being monitored and supported by a real time ground control. Eventually, future planetary missions will necessarily require a form of astronaut self-scheduling. We study the usage of a computer decision-support tool by a crew of analog astronauts, during a Mars simulation mission conducted at the Mars Desert Research Station (MDRS, Mars Society) in Utah. The proposed tool, called Romie, belongs to the new category of Robust Advanced Modelling and Scheduling (RAMS) systems. It allows the crew members (i) to visually model their scientific objectives and constraints, (ii) to compute near-optimal operational schedules while taking uncertainty into account, (iii) to monitor the execution of past and current activities, and (iv) to modify scientific objectives/constraints w.r.t. unforeseen events and opportunistic science. In this study, we empirically measure how the astronauts, who are novice planners, perform at using such a tool when self-scheduling under the realistic assumptions of a simulated Martian planetary habitat.

Robotics,Earth and Planetary Astrophysics,Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics,Artificial Intelligence,Human-Computer Interaction
About feasibility of SpaceX's human exploration Mars mission scenario with Starship

Volker Maiwald,Mika Bauerfeind,Svenja Fälker,Bjarne Westphal,Christian Bach

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-54012-0

IF: 4.6

2024-05-25

Scientific Reports

Abstract:After decades where human spaceflight missions have been reserved to low Earth orbit, recent years have seen mission proposals and even implemented plans, e.g. with the mission Artemis I, for returning to the lunar surface. SpaceX has published over various media (e.g., its official website, conference presentations, user manual) conceptual information for its reusable Starship to enable human exploration missions to the Martian surface by the end of the decade. The technological and human challenges associated with these plans are daunting. Such a mission at that distance would require excellent system reliability and in-situ-resource utilization on a grand scale, e.g. to produce propellant. The plans contain little details however and have not yet been reviewed concerning their feasibility. In this paper we show significant technological gaps in these plans. Based on estimates and extrapolated data, a mass model as needed to fulfill SpaceX's plans could not be reproduced and the subsequent trajectory optimization showed that the current plans do not yield a return flight opportunity, due to a too large system mass. Furthermore, significant gaps exist in relevant technologies, e.g. power supply for the Martian surface. It is unlikely that these gaps can be closed until the end of the decade. We recommend several remedies, e.g. stronger international participation to distribute technology development and thus improve feasibility. Overall, with the limited information published by SpaceX about its system and mission scenario and extrapolation from us to fill information gaps, we were not able to find a feasible Mars mission scenario using Starship, even when assuming optimal conditions such as 100% recovery rate of crew consumables during flight.

multidisciplinary sciences

The Path Partition Conjecture is true for some generalizations of tournaments

Final Report of the Mars Sample Return Science Planning Group 2 (MSPG2)

Science and Curation Considerations for the Design of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF)

Preliminary Planning for Mars Sample Return (MSR) Curation Activities in a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF)

The Scientific Importance of Returning Airfall Dust as a Part of Mars Sample Return (MSR)

The Mars Sample Return Project

Immunologic aspects of lepromatous leprosy with special reference to the study of antibodies.

Conceptual Design of Mars Sample Return Mission Using Solar Montgolfieres

MEP (Mars Environment Package): toward a package for studying environmental conditions at the surface of Mars from future lander/rover missions

Mission Architecture Using the SpaceX Starship Vehicle to Enable a Sustained Human Presence on Mars

In Situ Geochronology for the Next Decade: Mission Designs for the Moon, Mars, and Vesta

Future instruments and sustainable outposts for deep space, Moon and Mars: Highlights and lessons from geologists supporting Apollo astronauts

NASA's new Mars Exploration Program: the trajectory of knowledge

Submandibular salivary gland weight increase by administration of isoproterenol to rats.

Exoplanet Exploration Program Analysis Group (ExoPAG) Report to Paul Hertz Regarding Large Mission Concepts to Study for the 2020 Decadal Survey

Somatostatin Interneurons Control a Key Component of Mismatch Negativity in Mouse Visual Cortex.

Planetary Protection Implementation and Verification Approach for the Mars 2020 Mission

Report of the 6 th (Virtual) Meeting on the Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Human Missions to Mars June 1-2, 2022

Mercury Lander: Planetary Mission Concept Study for the 2023-2032 Decadal Survey

Enabling Astronaut Self-Scheduling using a Robust Advanced Modelling and Scheduling system: an assessment during a Mars analogue mission

About feasibility of SpaceX's human exploration Mars mission scenario with Starship