SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Humans”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 451 records · Page 25

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2015

Overview of the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA)

In 2013, the Human Research Program at NASA began developing a new confinement analog specifically for conducting research to investigate the effects of confinement on the human system. The HERA (Human Exploration Research Analog) habitat has been used for both 7 and 14 day missions to date to examine and mitigate exploration risks to enable safe, reliable and productive human space exploration. This presentation will describe how the Flight Analogs Project developed the HERA facility and the infrastructure to suit investigator requirements for confinement research and in the process developed a new approach to analog utilization and a new state of the art analog facility. Details regarding HERA operations will be discussed including specifics on the mission simulation utilized for the current 14-day campaign, the specifics of the facility (total volume, overall size, hardware), and the capabilities available to researchers. The overall operational philosophy, mission fidelity including timeline, schedule pressures and cadence, and development and implementation of mission stressors will be presented. Research conducted to date in the HERA has addressed risks associated with behavioral health and performance, human physiology, as well as human factors. This presentation will conclude with a discussion of future research plans for the HERA, including infrastructure improvements and additional research capabilities planned for the upcoming 30-day missions in 2016.

Neigut, J.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Robots and Humans: Synergy in Planetary Exploration

How will humans and robots cooperate in future planetary exploration? Are humans and robots fundamentally separate modes of exploration, or can humans and robots work together to synergistically explore the solar system? It is proposed that humans and robots can work together in exploring the planets by use of telerobotic operation to expand the function and usefulness of human explorers, and to extend the range of human exploration to hostile environments.

Landis, Geoffrey A.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Mars Surface System Common Capabilities and Challenges for Human Missions

NASA has begun a process to identify and evaluate candidate locations where humans could land, live and work on the martian surface. These locations are referred to as Exploration Zones (EZs). Given current mission concepts, an EZ is a collection of Regions of Interest (ROIs) that are located within approximately 100 kilometers of a centralized landing site. ROIs are areas that are relevant for scientific investigation and/or development/maturation of capabilities and resources necessary for a sustainable human presence. The EZ also contains a landing site and a habitation site that will be used by multiple human crews during missions to explore and utilize the ROIs within the EZ. In parallel with this process, NASA continues to make progress on the Evolvable Mars Campaign examining alternatives that can pioneer an extended human presence on Mars that is Earth independent. This involves ongoing assessments of surface systems and operations to enable a permanent, sustainable human presence. Because of the difficulty in getting equipment and supplies to the surface of Mars, part of these assessments involve identifying those systems and processes that can perform in multiple, sometimes completely unrelated, situations. These assessments have been performed in a very generic surface mission carried out at a very generic surface location. As specific candidate EZs are identified it becomes important to evaluate the current suite of surface systems and operations as they are likely to perform for the specific locations and for the types of operations - both scientific and development - that are proposed for these EZs. It is also important to evaluate the proposed EZs for their suitability to be explored or developed given the range of capabilities and constraints for the types of surface systems and operations being considered within the EMC. This means looking at setting up and operating a field station at a central location within the EZ as well as traversing to and exploring the scientific ROIs within the boundaries of the EZ. The proposed paper will describe the current status of common systems and operations as they can be applied to actual EZ locations on Mars. Initially these EZs will be the four locations identified MEPAG's Human Exploration of Mars Science Analysis Group (HEM‐SAG) that will be used as representative of the EZs that will emerge from the process that NASA has initiated. An example process that could be commonly applied is an approach for developing a field station site plan that would be demonstrated by applying this process to each of the four HEM‐SAG sites. Examples of common systems include (a) mobility systems that can be used to off‐load and move payloads to specific locations at the central field station location that could also be used to traverse long distances to reach some of the more remote ROIs or (b) robotic systems that can support various activities (such as system set up and maintenance) at the field station that could also be used to explore scientific ROIs and used to support site‐specific ISRU production activities.

Hoffman, Stephen J.↗

NASA NTRS2016

EVA Health and Human Performance Benchmarking Study

Multiple HRP Risks and Gaps require detailed characterization of human health and performance during exploration extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks; however, a rigorous and comprehensive methodology for characterizing and comparing the health and human performance implications of current and future EVA spacesuit designs does not exist. This study will identify and implement functional tasks and metrics, both objective and subjective, that are relevant to health and human performance, such as metabolic expenditure, suit fit, discomfort, suited postural stability, cognitive performance, and potentially biochemical responses for humans working inside different EVA suits doing functional tasks under the appropriate simulated reduced gravity environments. This study will provide health and human performance benchmark data for humans working in current EVA suits (EMU, Mark III, and Z2) as well as shirtsleeves using a standard set of tasks and metrics with quantified reliability. Results and methodologies developed during this test will provide benchmark data against which future EVA suits, and different suit configurations (eg, varied pressure, mass, CG) may be reliably compared in subsequent tests. Results will also inform fitness for duty standards as well as design requirements and operations concepts for future EVA suits and other exploration systems.

Abercromby, A. F.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide

The NASA/SP-2015-3709, Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide, also known as the "HSIPG," provides a tool for implementing HSI activities within the NASA systems engineering framework. The HSIPG is written to aid the HSI practitioner engaged in a program or project (P/P), and serves as a knowledge base to allow the practitioner to step into an HSI lead or team member role for NASA missions. Additionally, this HSIPG is written to address the role of HSI in the P/P management and systems engineering communities and aid their understanding of the value added by incorporating good HSI practices into their programs and projects. Through helping to build a community of knowledgeable HSI practitioners, this document also hopes to build advocacy across the Agency for establishing strong, consistent HSI policies and practices. Human Systems Integration (HSI) has been successfully adopted (and adapted) by several federal agencies-most notably the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-as a methodology for reducing system life cycle costs (LCCs). These cost savings manifest themselves due to reductions in required numbers of personnel, the practice of human-centered design, decreased reliance on specialized skills for operations, shortened training time, efficient logistics and maintenance, and fewer safety-related risks and mishaps due to unintended human/system interactions. The HSI process for NASA establishes how cost savings and mission success can be realized through systems engineering. Every program or project has unique attributes. This HSIPG is not intended to provide one-size-fits-all recommendations for HSI implementation. Rather, HSI processes should be tailored to the size, scope, and goals of individual situations. The instructions and processes identified here are best used as a starting point for implementing human-centered system concepts and designs across programs and projects of varying types, including manned and unmanned, human spaceflight, aviation, robotics, and environmental science missions. The practitioner using this guide should have expertise in Systems Engineering or other disciplines involved in producing systems with anticipated human interactions. (See section 1.6 of this guide for further discussion on HSI discipline domains.) The HSIPG provides an "HSI layer" to the NASA Systems Engineering Engine (SEE), detailed in NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 7123.1B, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, and further explained in NASA/SP-2007-6105, Systems Engineering Handbook (see HSIPG Table 2.2-1, NASA Documents with HSI Content, for specific references and document versions).

Zumbado, Jennifer Rochlis↗

NASA NTRS2016

Mars Surface Systems Common Capabilities and Challenges for Human Missions

This paper describes the current status of common systems and operations as they are applied to actual locations on Mars that are representative of Exploration Zones (EZ) - NASA's term for candidate locations where humans could land, live and work on the martian surface. Given NASA's current concepts for human missions to Mars, an EZ is a collection of Regions of Interest (ROIs) located within approximately 100 kilometers of a centralized landing site. ROIs are areas that are relevant for scientific investigation and/or development/maturation of capabilities and resources necessary for a sustainable human presence. An EZ also contains a habitation site that will be used by multiple human crews during missions to explore and utilize the ROIs within the EZ. The Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC), a description of NASA's current approach to these human Mars missions, assumes that a single EZ will be identified within which NASA will establish a substantial and durable surface infrastructure that will be used by multiple human crews. The process of identifying and eventually selecting this single EZ will likely take many years to finalized. Because of this extended EZ selection process it becomes important to evaluate the current suite of surface systems and operations being evaluated for the EMC as they are likely to perform at a variety of proposed EZ locations and for the types of operations - both scientific and development - that are proposed for these candidate EZs. It is also important to evaluate proposed EZs for their suitability to be explored or developed given the range of capabilities and constraints for the types of surface systems and operations being considered within the EMC.

Toups, Larry↗

NASA NTRS2015

Space Resource Utilization: Near-Term Missions and Long-Term Plans for Human Exploration

A primary goal of all major space faring nations is to explore space: from the Earth with telescopes, with robotic probes and space telescopes, and with humans. For the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), this pursuit is captured in three important strategic goals: 1. Ascertain the content, origin, and evolution of the solar system and the potential for life elsewhere, 2. Extend and sustain human activities across the solar system (especially the surface of Mars), and 3. Create innovative new space technologies for exploration, science, and economic future. While specific missions and destinations are still being discussed as to what comes first, it is imperative for NASA that it foster the development and implementation of new technologies and approaches that make space exploration affordable and sustainable. Critical to achieving affordable and sustainable human exploration beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) is the development of technologies and systems to identify, extract, and use resources in space instead of bringing everything from Earth. To reduce the development and implementation costs for space resource utilization, often called In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), it is imperative to work with terrestrial mining companies to spin-in/spin-off technologies and capabilities, and space mining companies to expand our economy beyond Earth orbit. In the last two years, NASA has focused on developing and implementing a sustainable human space exploration program with the ultimate goal of exploring the surface of Mars with humans. The plan involves developing technology and capability building blocks critical for sustained exploration starting with the Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion crew spacecraft and utilizing the International Space Station as a springboard into the solar system. The evolvable plan develops and expands human exploration in phases starting with missions that are reliant on Earth, to performing ever more challenging and longer duration missions in cis-lunar space and beyond, to eventually being independent from Earth. The goal is no longer just to reach a destination, but to enable people to work, learn, operate, and live safely beyond the Earth for extended periods of time, ultimately in ways that are more sustainable and even indefinite.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Human Extraterrestrial Missions Workshop Booklet - 2015

Although NASA's preparations for the Apollo lunar missions had only a limited time to consider issues associated with the protection of the Moon from biological contamination and the quarantine of the astronauts returning to Earth, they learned many valuable lessons (both positive and negative) in the process. As such, those efforts represent the baseline of planetary protection preparations for sending humans to Mars. Neither the post-Apollo experience or the Shuttle and other follow-on missions of either the US or Russian human spaceflight programs could add many additional insights to that baseline. Current mission designers have had the intervening four decades for their consideration, and in that time there has been much learned about human-associated microbes, about Mars, and about humans in space that has helped prepare us for a broad spectrum of considerations regarding potential biological contamination in human Mars missions and how to control it. This paper will review the approaches used in getting this far, and highlight some implications of this history for the future development of planetary protection provisions for human missions to Mars. The role of NASA and ESA's planetary protection offices, and the aegis of COSPAR have been particularly important in the ongoing process.

Fonda, Mark L.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. In order to determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana↗

NASA NTRS2017

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. To determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators, and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules, and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana L.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Design Considerations for Spacecraft Operations During Uncrewed Dormant Phases of Human Exploration Missions

NASA is transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities in low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. However, pioneering space involves daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. Subject matter experts from NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) are currently studying a human exploration campaign that involves deployment of assets for planetary exploration. This study, called the Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) study, explores options with solar electric propulsion as a central component of the transportation architecture. This particular in-space transportation option often results in long duration transit to destinations. The EMC study is also investigating deployed human rated systems like landers, habitats, rovers, power systems and ISRU system to the surface of Mars, which also will involve long dormant periods when these systems are staged on the surface. In order to enable the EMC architecture, campaign and element design leads along with system and capability development experts from HEOMD's System Maturation Team (SMT) have identified additional capabilities, systems and operation modes that will sustain these systems especially during these dormant phases of the mission. Dormancy is defined by the absence of crew and relative inactivity of the systems. For EMC missions, dormant periods could range from several months to several years. Two aspects of uncrewed dormant operations are considered herein: (1) the vehicle systems that are placed in a dormant state and (2) the autonomous vehicle systems and robotic capabilities that monitor, maintain, and repair the vehicle and systems. This paper describes the mission stages of dormancy operations, phases of dormant operations, and critical system capabilities that are needed for dormant operations. This paper will compare dormancy operations of past robotic missions to identify lessons that can be applied to planned human exploration missions. Finally, this paper will also identify future work and analysis planned to assess system performance metrics and integrated system operations.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗

NASA NTRS2017

Dust Storm Impacts on Human Mars Mission Equipment and Operations

Although it is tempting to use dust impacts on Apollo lunar exploration mission equipment and operations as an analog for human Mars exploration, there are a number of important differences to consider. Apollo missions were about a week long; a human Mars mission will start at least two years before crew depart from Earth, when cargo is pre-deployed, and crewed mission duration may be over 800 days. Each Apollo mission landed at a different site; although no decisions have been made, NASA is investigating multiple human missions to a single Mars landing site, building up capability over time and lowering costs by re-using surface infrastructure. Apollo missions used two, single-use spacecraft; a human Mars mission may require as many as six craft for different phases of the mission, most of which would be re-used by subsequent crews. Apollo crews never ventured more than a few kilometers from their lander; Mars crews may take "camping trips" a hundred kilo-meters or more from their landing site, utilizing pressurized rovers to explore far from their base. Apollo mission designers weren't constrained by human for-ward contamination of the Moon; if we plan to search for evidence of life on Mars we'll have to be more careful. These differences all impact how we will mitigate and manage dust on our human Mars mission equipment and operations.

Rucker, M. A.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Next Steps in Planetary Protection for Human Spaceflight

Planetary protection is defined as: a) the prevention of contamination of extraterrestrial bodies by terrestrial microorganisms, and b) biohazard containment of returned samples from bodies in the Solar System that could harbor life.1 While the majority of interplanetary missions to date have involved robotic exploration, future missions will include human explorers. Current planetary protection requirements do not address the unique challenges associated with human exploration. The purpose of this abstract is to review planetary protection efforts for crewed missions and provide a forward plan for implementing them at the systems level. Article IX of the UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967 provides the definition of planetary protection, outlined above.1 COSPAR holds the international standard in line with this treaty2, while NASA's Planetary Protection Policy (NPD 8020.7G) outlines the U.S. implementation of the COSPAR standard. 3;4 NPI 8020.7 groups future human spaceflight planetary protection studies as follows: 1) microbial monitoring, 2) contamination mitigation and control, and 3) environmental effects. Additionally, a NPI 8020.7 outlines a five-step plan for forward work: 1) a literature review, 2) community inputs, 3) completion of recommended studies, 4) developing a draft NPR, and 5) implementation with NASA teams. The literature review was published in 2016.5 Inputs from the community were gathered at the Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Human Extraterrestrial Missions, held in 2015.6 Johnson and Race (2016) outlined notional requirements and prioritized studies needed before final requirements can be produced. This prior work sets the stage for completing the necessary studies and finalizing planetary protection requirements for human spaceflight. We propose a continuation of the systems engineering approach adopted thus far. The challenges associated with the implementation of notional requirements will be quantified in detailed discussions with internal stakeholders. The status and results of high-priority studies that have been completed since 2016 or are ongoing will be incorporated into discussions with stakeholders. In this way, we plan to bridge the gap between the science behind planetary protection and the engineering development that will implement it, allowing finalized planetary protection requirements to be developed for future human space missions.

Mitchell, Julie↗

NASA NTRS2018

Considerations for Implementing Voice-Controlled Spacecraft Systems Through a Human-Centered Design Approach

As computational power and speech recognition algorithms improve, the consumer market will see better-performing speech recognition applications. The cell phone and Internet-related service industry have further enhanced speech recognition applications using artificial intelligence and statistical data-mining techniques. These improvements to speech recognition technology (SRT) may one day help astronauts on future deep space human missions that require control of complex spacecraft systems or spacesuit applications by voice. Though SRT and more advanced speech recognition techniques show promise, use of this technology for a space application such as vehicle/habitat/spacesuit requires careful considerations. There are still recognition challenges to overcome such as background noise, human speech variability, and task loading. However, implemented correctly, a voice-controlled spacecraft system (VCSS) can provide a useful, natural and efficient form of human-machine communications during complex tasks such as when the hands and eyes are busy or as an aid for vehicle situational awareness inquiries or collaborative human-robot tasks. This document provides considerations and guidance for the use of SRT in VCSS applications for space missions, specifically in command-and-control (C2) applications where the commanding is user-initiated. First, current SRT limitations as known at the time of this report are given. Then, highlights of SRT used in the space program provide the reader with a history of some of the human spaceflight applications and research. Next, an overview of the speech production process and the intrinsic variations of speech are provided. Finally, general guidance and considerations are given for development of a VCSS using a human-centered design approach for space applications that includes vocabulary selection and performance testing, as well as VCSS considerations for C2 dialogue management design, feedback, error handling, and evaluation/usability testing. Available from

Salazar, George A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Flying Through the Ages: Rodent Research for Human Health

As humans, we evolved, developed, grew, and now function in a continuous 1-gravity environment. Habitation in space poses unique challenges to human cells and organ systems. Biomedical research with rodents (primarily mice and rats) can help to both unravel molecular, cellular and physiologic mechanisms relevant to humans and test candidate interventions that mitigate adverse effects of space on humans, such as muscle atrophy, bone loss and cardiovascular deconditioning. One favored hypothesis that may explain the detrimental effects of spaceflight on humans is that reduced mechanical loading in microgravity accelerates aging. Rodents provide a relevant model system to study this problem as they age 40 times faster than humans. Now scientists from both public and commercial sectors conduct rodent experiments on the ISS using a new capability developed primarily at ARC. Results from the maiden voyage of the Rodent Research Project on the ISS reveal that long duration effects of spaceflight appear far different than short duration effects. Thus, Rodent Research missions on the ISS usher in a new era for exploration and biological discovery in space.

Globus, Ruth↗

NASA NTRS2018

Human Exploration of Mars: Preliminary Lists of Crew Tasks

This is a preliminary report of ongoing research that has identified 1,125 tasks that are likely to be performed during initial human expeditions to Mars. The purpose of the report is to facilitate immediate access to the task inventory by researchers whose efforts might benefit from concrete examples of the work that will likely be performed by the first human explorers of Mars and the tasks for which crew members must be prepared to perform in response to emergencies. The research that led to the task lists is being conducted under Cooperative Agreement NNX15AW34G / NNX16AQ86G for the Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element, Human Performance Program, NASA’s Johnson Space Center. The study is ongoing and will conclude with a final report that documents all research activities and presents the results of task and ability analyses and the implications of study results to crew size and composition, personnel selection and training, and design of equipment and procedures. The research addresses the Risk of Inadequate Mission, Process, and Task Design and the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies by identifying the work that will be performed during an expedition to Mars and the abilities, skills, and knowledge that will be required of crew members. The study began by developing the comprehensive inventory of 1,125 tasks that are likely to be performed during the 12 phases of initial human expeditions to Mars, from launch to landing 30 months later. This full-mission task inventory was generated by a comprehensive review of documentation and concepts of operations with the understanding that plans and tasks might change in response to continuing technological development. Note: This interim report includes no discussion of analyses and has been prepared solely to facilitate dissemination of the task lists to others whose research might benefit from detailed information about the work and other activities that are likely to be performed during the human exploration of Mars.

Stuster, Jack W.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Biocybernetic Adaptation Strategies: Machine Awareness of Human Engagement for Improved Operational Performance

Human operators interacting with machines or computers continually adapt to the needs of the system ideally resulting in optimal performance. In some cases, however, deteriorated performance is an outcome. Adaptation to the situation is a strength expected of the human operator which is often accomplished by the human through self-regulation of mental state. Adaptation is at the core of the human operator's activity, and research has demonstrated that the implementation of a feedback loop can enhance this natural skill to improve training and human/machine interaction. Biocybernetic adaptation involves a “loop upon a loop,” which may be visualized as a superimposed loop which senses a physiological signal and influences the operator’s task at some point. Biocybernetic adaptation in, for example, physiologically adaptive automation employs the “steering” sense of “cybernetic,” and serves a transitory adaptive purpose – to better serve the human operator by more fully representing their responses to the sys- tem. The adaptation process usually makes use of an assessment of transient cog- nitive state to steer a functional aspect of a system that is external to the operator’s physiology from which the state assessment is derived. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to detail the structure of biocybernetic systems regarding the level of engagement of interest for adaptive systems, their processing pipeline, and the adaptation strategies employed for training purposes, in an effort to pave the way towards machine awareness of human state for self-regulation and improved operational performance.

Stephens, Chad↗

NASA NTRS2019

Exploring Beyond Earth's Atmosphere with Human-Machine Teams

NASA's highly successful Kepler Mission has revolutionized our understanding of the Galaxy. We now know that planets, even Earth-size planets in the habitable zone, are common. With the end of the Kepler Mission we now look to the future with the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) which will discover thousands of exoplanets in orbit around the brightest stars in the sky. In a two-year survey, TESS will perform an all-sky search of more than 200,000 stars for temporary drops in brightness caused by planetary transits. With Kepler and TESS, humanity is finally at the verge of studying the masses, sizes, densities, orbits, and atmospheres of a large cohort of small planets, including a sample of rocky worlds in the habitable zones of their host stars which may prove to host life. The massive data sets generated by Kepler and TESS must be meticulously combed for the weakest planetary signals every month. While a daunting and error-prone task for humans, this is an exciting opportunity for the breakthroughs recently seen in machine learning. Specifically, traditional methods for identifying planet transits require extensive data processing pipelines followed by extensive human vetting. This manual process risks loss of information due to the data processing and to inconsistency and biases due to individual human vetters. The latest advancements in machine learning will allow an objective classifier to minimize the losses of information and greatly lessen the burden on the human vetters, in addition to providing assessment of quality and score to each planet candidate, freeing the humans to concentrate on border cases and other more interesting investigations.

Smith, Jeffrey C.↗