SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “human building interaction”

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 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2022

Increasing the Uptake of Ecological Model Results in Policy Decisions to Improve Biodiversity Outcomes

Models help decision-makers anticipate the consequences of policies for ecosystems and people; for instance, improving our ability to represent interactions between human activities and ecological systems is essential to identify pathways to meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. However, use of modeling outputs in decision-making remains uncommon. We share insights from a multidisciplinary National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center working group on technical, communication, and process-related factors that facilitate or hamper uptake of model results. We emphasize that it is not simply technical model improvements, but active and iterative stakeholder involvement that can lead to more impactful outcomes. In particular, trust- and relationship-building with decision-makers are key for knowledge-based decision making. In this respect, nurturing knowledge exchange on the interpersonal (e.g., through participatory processes), and institutional level (e.g., through science-policy interfaces across scales), represent promising approaches. To this end, we offer a generalized approach for linking modeling and decision-making.

Biodiversity-ecosystem function relationships↗

NASA NTRS1998

User Directed Tools for Exploiting Expert Knowledge in an Immersive Segmentation and Visualization Environment

Volumetric data sets have become common in medicine and many sciences through technologies such as computed x-ray tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR), positron emission tomography (PET), confocal microscopy and 3D ultrasound. When presented with 2D images humans immediately and unconsciously begin a visual analysis of the scene. The viewer surveys the scene identifying significant landmarks and building an internal mental model of presented information. The identification of features is strongly influenced by the viewers expectations based upon their expert knowledge of what the image should contain. While not a conscious activity, the viewer makes a series of choices about how to interpret the scene. These choices occur in parallel with viewing the scene and effectively change the way the viewer sees the image. It is this interaction of viewing and choice which is the basis of many familiar visual illusions. This is especially important in the interpretation of medical images where it is the expert knowledge of the radiologist which interprets the image. For 3D data sets this interaction of view and choice is frustrated because choices must precede the visualization of the data set. It is not possible to visualize the data set with out making some initial choices which determine how the volume of data is presented to the eye. These choices include, view point orientation, region identification, color and opacity assignments. Further compounding the problem is the fact that these visualization choices are defined in terms of computer graphics as opposed to language of the experts knowledge. The long term goal of this project is to develop an environment where the user can interact with volumetric data sets using tools which promote the utilization of expert knowledge by incorporating visualization and choice into a tight computational loop. The tools will support activities involving the segmentation of structures, construction of surface meshes and local filtering of the data set. To conform to this environment tools should have several key attributes. First, they should be only rely on computations over a local neighborhood of the probe position. Second, they should operate iteratively over time converging towards a limit behavior. Third, they should adapt to user input modifying they operational parameters with time.

Senger, Steven O.↗

NASA NTRS1995

A user-system interface agent

Agent-based technologies answer to several challenges posed by additional information processing requirements in today's computing environments. In particular, (1) users desire interaction with computing devices in a mode which is similar to that used between people, (2) the efficiency and successful completion of information processing tasks often require a high-level of expertise in complex and multiple domains, (3) information processing tasks often require handling of large volumes of data and, therefore, continuous and endless processing activities. The concept of an agent is an attempt to address these new challenges by introducing information processing environments in which (1) users can communicate with a system in a natural way, (2) an agent is a specialist and a self-learner and, therefore, it qualifies to be trusted to perform tasks independent of the human user, and (3) an agent is an entity that is continuously active performing tasks that are either delegated to it or self-imposed. The work described in this paper focuses on the development of an interface agent for users of a complex information processing environment (IPE). This activity is part of an on-going effort to build a model for developing agent-based information systems. Such systems will be highly applicable to environments which require a high degree of automation, such as, flight control operations and/or processing of large volumes of data in complex domains, such as the EOSDIS environment and other multidisciplinary, scientific data systems. The concept of an agent as an information processing entity is fully described with emphasis on characteristics of special interest to the User-System Interface Agent (USIA). Issues such as agent 'existence' and 'qualification' are discussed in this paper. Based on a definition of an agent and its main characteristics, we propose an architecture for the development of interface agents for users of an IPE that is agent-oriented and whose resources are likely to be distributed and heterogeneous in nature. The architecture of USIA is outlined in two main components: (1) the user interface which is concerned with issues as user dialog and interaction, user modeling, and adaptation to user profile, and (2) the system interface part which deals with identification of IPE capabilities, task understanding and feasibility assessment, and task delegation and coordination of assistant agents.

Wakim, Nagi T.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Spatial interpretation of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center Payload Operations Control Center using virtual reality technology

In its search for higher level computer interfaces and more realistic electronic simulations for measurement and spatial analysis in human factors design, NASA at MSFC is evaluating the functionality of virtual reality (VR) technology. Virtual reality simulation generates a three dimensional environment in which the participant appears to be enveloped. It is a type of interactive simulation in which humans are not only involved, but included. Virtual reality technology is still in the experimental phase, but it appears to be the next logical step after computer aided three-dimensional animation in transferring the viewer from a passive to an active role in experiencing and evaluating an environment. There is great potential for using this new technology when designing environments for more successful interaction, both with the environment and with another participant in a remote location. At the University of North Carolina, a VR simulation of a the planned Sitterson Hall, revealed a flaw in the building's design that had not been observed during examination of the more traditional building plan simulation methods on paper and on computer aided design (CAD) work station. The virtual environment enables multiple participants in remote locations to come together and interact with one another and with the environment. Each participant is capable of seeing herself and the other participants and of interacting with them within the simulated environment.

Lindsey, Patricia 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 NTRS2017

Launch Control Network Engineer

The Spaceport Command and Control System (SCCS) is being built at the Kennedy Space Center in order to successfully launch NASA’s revolutionary vehicle that allows humans to explore further into space than ever before. During my internship, I worked with the Network, Firewall, and Hardware teams that are all contributing to the huge SCCS network project effort. I learned the SCCS network design and the several concepts that are running in the background. I also updated and designed documentation for physical networks that are part of SCCS. This includes being able to assist and build physical installations as well as configurations. I worked with the network design for vehicle telemetry interfaces to the Launch Control System (LCS); this allows the interface to interact with other systems at other NASA locations. This network design includes the Space Launch System (SLS), Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), and the Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). I worked on the network design and implementation in the Customer Avionics Interface Development and Analysis (CAIDA) lab.

Medeiros, Samantha↗

NASA NTRS1994

Architecture and evolution of Goddard Space Flight Center Distributed Active Archive Center

The Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) has been developed to enhance Earth Science research by improved access to remote sensor earth science data. Building and operating an archive, even one of a moderate size (a few Terabytes), is a challenging task. One of the critical components of this system is Unitree, the Hierarchical File Storage Management System. Unitree, selected two years ago as the best available solution, requires constant system administrative support. It is not always suitable as an archive and distribution data center, and has moderate performance. The Data Archive and Distribution System (DADS) software developed to monitor, manage, and automate the ingestion, archive, and distribution functions turned out to be more challenging than anticipated. Having the software and tools is not sufficient to succeed. Human interaction within the system must be fully understood to improve efficiency to improve efficiency and ensure that the right tools are developed. One of the lessons learned is that the operability, reliability, and performance aspects should be thoroughly addressed in the initial design. However, the GSFC DAAC has demonstrated that it is capable of distributing over 40 GB per day. A backup system to archive a second copy of all data ingested is under development. This backup system will be used not only for disaster recovery but will also replace the main archive when it is unavailable during maintenance or hardware replacement. The GSFC DAAC has put a strong emphasis on quality at all level of its organization. A Quality team has also been formed to identify quality issues and to propose improvements. The DAAC has conducted numerous tests to benchmark the performance of the system. These tests proved to be extremely useful in identifying bottlenecks and deficiencies in operational procedures.

Bedet, Jean-Jacques↗

NASA NTRS2018

A Study of the Carbon Cycle Using NASA Observations and the GEOS Model

The Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) model has been developed in the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO) at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. From its roots in chemical transport and as a General Circulation Model, the GEOS model has been extended to an Earth System Model based on a modular construction using the Earth System Modeling Framework (ESMF), combining elements developed in house in the GMAO with others that are imported through collaborative research. It is used extensively for research and for product generation, both as a free-running model and as the core of the GMAO's data assimilation system. In recent years, the GMAO's modeling and assimilation efforts have been strongly supported by Piers Sellers, building on both his earlier legacy as an observationally oriented model developer and his post-astronaut career as a dynamic leader into new territory. Piers' long-standing interest in the carbon cycle and the combination of models with observations motivates this presentation, which will focus on the representation of the carbon cycle in the GEOS Earth System Model. Examples will include: (i) the progression from specified land-atmosphere surface fluxes to computations with an interactive model component (Catchment-CN), along with constraints on vegetation distributions using satellite observations; (ii) the use of high-resolution satellite observations to constrain human-generated inputs to the atmosphere; (iii) studies of the consistency of the observed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations with those in the model simulations. The presentation will focus on year-to-year variations in elements of the carbon cycle, specifically on how the observations can inform the representation of mechanisms in the model and lead to integrity in global carbon dioxide simulations. Further, applications of the GEOS model to the planning of new carbon-climate observations will be addressed, as an example of the work that was strongly supported by Piers in the last months of his leadership of Earth Science at NASA Goddard.

Pawson, Steven↗

NASA NTRS1983

Bringing AI up to the space challenge

The state of the art in automated systems for working in environments hostile to humans is assessed, together with the technological advancements necessary to meet NASA goals. Since completely automated operations are not possible with the current level of artificial intelligence (AI), the operator must have access to remote television access and interactive computerized controls. A proximal system exists when the teleoperated mechanism is close enough so that negligible time passes between operator and servocontrolled activation and feedback. An additional constraint is the complexity of the signal. Further development areas have been identified as limiting the necessary communication, compensating for technical limitations of communication with remote systems, such as bandwidth, error rate, and equipment response time, and to build-in fault tolerance, self-diagnosis, and self-maintenance capabilities. An AI expert system is being developed at JPL to provide an expert knowledge base and a decision-making capability. It is suggested that only thorough questioning of mission and spacecraft experts, as well as searching the large volume of project documentations, will provide the necessary data for establishing an expert data base for AI implementation.

Heer, E.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Large Vehicle Lunar Landing Surface Interaction and In-Situ Resource Based Risk Mitigation: Landing & Launch Pads

A key capability required for the exploration of planetary bodies is the ability to land on the surface. Previous work performed by NASA and other institutions has primarily focused on landing small spacecraft on planetary surfaces and the associated small-to-medium thrusters required for the soft landing. In the case of human exploration—particularly the establishment of long duration exploration and habitation outposts—the ability to land large landers, such as the SpaceX Starship, is necessary. These larger landing systems require the use of more powerful engines, with higher engine exhaust temperatures and higher landing loads. Understanding the excavation of material by the engines, as well as the potential for the landing legs to sink into the subsurface, is key in ensuring reliable and safe landings. A further improvement in landing reliability can be achieved by constructing landing / launch pads, especially with in-situ resources. Some material excavation by the plume is inevitable, leaving at least a portion of the surface scoured and uneven under the lander and ejecting regolith particles and rocks at very high velocities. One possible solution would be to robotically build landing / launch pads (ideally autonomously) at the destination using in-situ materials. In this case, the first one or few landers will need to land on unimproved surfaces at higher risk; however, they would bring the required equipment to build the landing pads with mostly local resources, thus increasing the reliability of safe landing for subsequent larger landers. A number of methods to build in-situ landing and launch pads have already been developed. These methods include no, or some, addition of required binder additives to the local regolith material, different processing approaches and result in varying landing pad strengths. A sub-scale rocket engine plume, was used to simulate some of the conditions of a landing on the Moon to assess the effectiveness of various materials for an in-situ built landing pad, The GO2/GCH4rocket engine fired on a 1m2area coupons of representative pad materials. The results will allow continued development towards materials that satisfy the landing pad properties required for the effective risk reduction and increased reliability for landing people and equipment on the lunar surface. This work contained two parts: (1) computer modeling of a large rocket engine plume interacting with regolith on the Moon, using the Granular Gas Flow Solver (GGFS) provided by CFD Research Corporation as well as other computational fluid dynamics codes (CFD) such as Loci/CHEM. (2) Developing landing/launch pad materials that could be used for in-situ construction on the lunar surface in the future, to mitigate the calculated effects of a large vehicle rocket engine landing and launching on the Moon.

Lunar↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Large Vehicle Lunar Landing Surface Interaction and In-Situ Resource Based Risk Mitigation: Landing & Launch Pads

A key capability required for the exploration of planetary bodies is the ability to land on the surface. Previous work performed by NASA and other institutions has primarily focused on landing small spacecraft on planetary surfaces and the associated small-to-medium thrusters required for the soft landing. In the case of human exploration—particularly the establishment of long duration exploration and habitation outposts—the ability to land large landers, such as the SpaceX Starship, is necessary. These larger landing systems require the use of more powerful engines, with higher engine exhaust temperatures and higher landing loads. Understanding the excavation of material by the engines, as well as the potential for the landing legs to sink into the subsurface, is key in ensuring reliable and safe landings. A further improvement in landing reliability can be achieved by constructing landing / launch pads, especially with in-situ resources. Some material excavation by the plume is inevitable, leaving at least a portion of the surface scoured and uneven under the lander and ejecting regolith particles and rocks at very high velocities. One possible solution would be to robotically build landing / launch pads (ideally autonomously) at the destination using in-situ materials. In this case, the first one or few landers will need to land on unimproved surfaces at higher risk; however, they would bring the required equipment to build the landing pads with mostly local resources, thus increasing the reliability of safe landing for subsequent larger landers. A number of methods to build in-situ landing and launch pads have already been developed. These methods include no or some addition of required binder additives to the local regolith material, different processing approaches and result in varying landing pad strengths. A sub-scale rocket engine plume, was used to simulate some of the conditions of a landing on the Moon to assess the effectiveness of various materials for an in-situ built landing pad, The GO2/GCH4 rocket engine fired on 1m2 area coupons of representative pad materials. The results will allow continued development towards materials that satisfy the landing pad properties required for the effective risk reduction and increased reliability for landing people and equipment on the lunar surface. This work contained two parts: (1) computer modeling of a large rocket engine plume interacting with regolith on the Moon, using the Granular Gas Flow Solver (GGFS) provided by CFD Research Corporation as well as other computational fluid dynamics codes (CFD) such as Loci/CHEM. (2) Developing landing/launch pad materials that could be used for in-situ construction on the lunar surface in the future, to mitigate the calculated effects of a large vehicle rocket engine landing and launching on the Moon. The resulting computed values of plume impingement surface temperature, stagnation pressure, gas velocity, shear stress and heat flux were then matched as closely as possible in the Earth’s atmosphere in a sub-scale rocket engine GO2/CH4 test which was provided by Masten Space Systems in Mojave, California. The rocket engine was mounted on a test stand with vertical translation capabilities so that the landing operations of a lander could be simulated (Figure 1).The pad materials test coupons were placed at the surface of a large bin containing simulated lunar basalt regolith and subjected to a test firing as shown in Figure 2. The results of this testing will be presented with related findings, analysis and discussion.

Plume Surface Interaction↗

NASA NTRS2015

Collaborating with Autonomous Agents

With the anticipated increase of small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) entering into the National Airspace System, it is highly likely that vehicle operators will be teaming with fleets of small autonomous vehicles. The small vehicles may consist of sUAS, which are 55 pounds or less that typically will y at altitudes 400 feet and below, and small ground vehicles typically operating in buildings or defined small campuses. Typically, the vehicle operators are not concerned with manual control of the vehicle; instead they are concerned with the overall mission. In order for this vision of high-level mission operators working with fleets of vehicles to come to fruition, many human factors related challenges must be investigated and solved. First, the interface between the human operator and the autonomous agent must be at a level that the operator needs and the agents can understand. This paper details the natural language human factors e orts that NASA Langley's Autonomy Incubator is focusing on. In particular these e orts focus on allowing the operator to interact with the system using speech and gestures rather than a mouse and keyboard. With this ability of the system to understand both speech and gestures, operators not familiar with the vehicle dynamics will be able to easily plan, initiate, and change missions using a language familiar to them rather than having to learn and converse in the vehicle's language. This will foster better teaming between the operator and the autonomous agent which will help lower workload, increase situation awareness, and improve performance of the system as a whole.

Trujillo, Anna C.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Intelligent systems and advanced user interfaces for design, operation, and maintenance of command management systems

Historically, command management systems (CMS) have been large and expensive spacecraft-specific software systems that were costly to build, operate, and maintain. Current and emerging hardware, software, and user interface technologies may offer an opportunity to facilitate the initial formulation and design of a spacecraft-specific CMS as well as to develop a more generic CMS system. New technologies, in addition to a core CMS common to a range of spacecraft, may facilitate the training and enhance the efficiency of CMS operations. Current mission operations center (MOC) hardware and software include Unix workstations, the C/C++ programming languages, and an X window interface. This configuration provides the power and flexibility to support sophisticated and intelligent user interfaces that exploit state-of-the-art technologies in human-machine interaction, artificial intelligence, and software engineering. One of the goals of this research is to explore the extent to which technologies developed in the research laboratory can be productively applied in a complex system such as spacecraft command management. Initial examination of some of these issues in CMS design and operation suggests that application of technologies such as intelligent planning, case-based reasoning, human-machine systems design and analysis tools (e.g., operator and designer models), and human-computer interaction tools (e.g., graphics, visualization, and animation) may provide significant savings in the design, operation, and maintenance of the CMS for a specific spacecraft as well as continuity for CMS design and development across spacecraft. The first six months of this research saw a broad investigation by Georgia Tech researchers into the function, design, and operation of current and planned command management systems at Goddard Space Flight Center. As the first step, the researchers attempted to understand the current and anticipated horizons of command management systems at Goddard. Preliminary results are given on CMS commonalities and causes of low re-use, and methods are proposed to facilitate increased re-use.

Potter, William J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Fall 2015 NASA Internship, and Space Radiation Health Project

This fall, I was fortunate enough to have been able to participate in an internship at NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center. I was placed into the Human Health & Performance Directorate, where I was specifically tasked to work with Dr. Zarana Patel, researching the impacts of cosmic level radiation on human cells. Using different laboratory techniques, we were able to examine the cells to see if any damage had been done due to radiation exposure, and if so, how much damage was done. Cell culture samples were exposed at different doses, and fixed at different time points so that we could accumulate a large pool of quantifiable data. After examining quantifiable results relative to the impacts of space radiation on the human body at the cellular and chromosomal level, researchers can defer to different areas of the space program that have to do with astronaut safety, and research and development (extravehicular mobility unit construction, vehicle design and construction, etc.). This experience has been very eye-opening, and I was able to learn quite a bit. I learned some new laboratory techniques, and I did my best to try and learn new ways to balance such a hectic work and school schedule. I also learned some very intimate thing about working at NASA; I learned that far more people want to watch you succeed, rather than watch you fail, and I also learned that this is a place that is alive with innovators and explorers - people who have a sole purpose of exploring space for the betterment of humanity, and not for any other reason. It's truly inspiring. All of these experiences during my internship have impacted me in a really profound way, so much that my educational and career goals are completely different than when I started. I started out as a biotechnology major, and I discovered recently toward the end of the internship, that I don't want to work in a lab, nor was I as enthralled by biological life sciences as a believed myself to be. Taking that all into consideration, I've actually changed my major to mechanical engineering. I discovered that I enjoy building things, and I enjoy learning about materials and interactions between different things. And I quickly became obsessed with rocket and aerospace engineering, so I've decided that after a mechanical engineering degree, I will be pursuing an advanced degree in aerospace engineering. One final way that I was effected by this internship, is that I discovered that I don't want to have a career at NASA. I love this agency with all of my heart, but I refuse to allow my innovation to be bound by a scientifically illiterate congress. As such, I have decided to pursue commercial aerospace companies, such as Space, XCOR, Masten Space Systems, Orbital ATK, and many, many, more. Maybe one day I'll end up back here. I believe in what this agency is doing with my whole heart, and it's unfortunate to see them curtailed in some capacities as a result of budgetary constraints, brought on by people who don't fully understand the effort behind putting people in to space. All in all, this experience has been the best experience of my life - literally a childhood dream came true during this experience - and I cannot adequately explain how grateful I am to have been here for the past sixteen weeks.

Patience, Luke↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Open Science for Life in Space: Data Sharing and Tools for Knowledge Discovery

The next era in human space exploration is rapidly approaching and will require the use of countermeasures to deep space health hazards. The development of countermeasures (or, there-purposing of existing agents) will be highly dependent on our understanding of basic biological responses to space stressors (e.g. ionizing radiation, altered gravitational fields, altered day-night cycles, confinement, isolation, hostile-closed environments, distance-duration from Earth, exposure to celestial regolith, etc.). The fast-growing array of space biological data, which in the past was simply archived after minimal analysis, holds great potential if it can be reorganized and formatted for Open Science. Organizing the data for such analysis is a challenge because of its diverse nature (molecular, cellular, tissue, imaging, whole organism and behavior). We will discuss here several strategies that NASA's Biological and Physical Science Division has put in place to maximize the return on investment for spaceflight bioscience data. Open Science, as a scientific philosophy, is the concept that the more people who have access to the data, the more knowledge will be gained from it. This guiding principle led NASA to develop GeneLab in 2015. GeneLab houses spaceflight and relevant ground-based multi-omics data, and has grown to ~400 transcriptomatic, proteomic, metabolomic and epigenomic datasets from plant, rodent, small animal, and microbial space experiments. GeneLab provides users with various tools for data analysis and a visualization portal that allows users to interact with gene expression data from space-related 'omics experiments. Open Science is also about building scientific communities, and with this spirit in mind, GeneLab has spawned several Analysis Working Groups (AWGs), comprised of more than 200 volunteer scientists. The AWGs initially provided feedback on the processing pipeline and metadata 'omics standards for GeneLab. Over the last few years, they have become a community-driven science enterprise, engaging in large meta-analysis of GeneLab datasets, resulting in 10 publications (beyond the originally submitted research). Overall, the Open Science nature of GeneLab has resulted in a high degree of data-use, resulting in 40 enabled publications by open data. The enormous success and knowledge gained from GeneLab has led to a collection of sister NASA "Open Science Data Repositories (OSDR)" and research support groups. These include the NASA Ames Life Sciences Data Archive (ALSDA), the NASA Biological Institutional Scientific Collection (NBISC), and the Biospecimen Sharing Program (BSP). All are adopting the GeneLab data architecture system to maximize open-access, find-ability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR). ALSDA collects and curates phenotypic-physiological bioimaging-behavioral data from space and space-relevant non-human experiments, oftentimes coming from the same omics-associated experimental datasets found in GeneLab. Since 2021, a community of ~100 researchers have rallied around ALSDA, to provide feedback in a new ALSDA AWG focused on phenotypic-physiological investigation-sample-assay metadata standards (e.g., Micro-Computed Tomography, Light/Flourescence Microscopy, Western Blot, Flow Cytometry, Novel Object Recognition, Elevated Plus Maze, etc. of ~50 assays collected). These standards are part of a new single point-of-entry data submission portal for all non-human Space Biology and Human Research Program principal investigators, to submit, curate, and share their research data. With open-access space biological data now collected and curated together with rich metadata, and with the potential for linkage to "big data" from the international biological and medical communities (NIH, EBI, etc.), the artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) era has started for Space Biology.

omics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Open Science for Life in Space: Data Sharing and Tools for Knowledge Discovery

The next era in human space exploration is rapidly approaching and will require the use of countermeasures to deep space health hazards. The development of countermeasures (or, the re-purposing of existing agents) will be highly dependent on our understanding of basic biological responses to space stressors (e.g. ionizing radiation, altered gravitational fields, altered day-night cycles, confinement, isolation, hostile-closed environments, distance-duration from Earth, exposure to celestial regolith, etc.). The fast-growing array of space biological data, which in the past was simply archived after minimal analysis, holds great potential if it can be reorganized and formatted for Open Science. Organizing the data for such analysis is a challenge because of its diverse nature (molecular, cellular, tissue, imaging, whole organism and behavior). We will discuss here several strategies that NASA’s Biological and Physical Science Division has put in place to maximize the return on investment for spaceflight bioscience data. Open Science, as a scientific philosophy, is the concept that the more people who have access to the data, the more knowledge will be gained from it. This guiding principle led NASA to develop GeneLab in 2015. GeneLab houses spaceflight and relevant ground-based multi-omics data, and has grown to ~400 transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic and epigenomic datasets from plant, rodent, small animal, and microbial space experiments. GeneLab provides users with various tools for data analysis and a visualization portal that allows users to interact with gene expression data from space-related ‘omics experiments. Open Science is also about building scientific communities, and with this spirit in mind, GeneLab has spawned several Analysis Working Groups (AWGs), comprised of more than 200 volunteer scientists. The AWGs initially provided feedback on the processing pipeline and metadata ‘omics standards for GeneLab. Over the last few years, they have become a community-driven science enterprise, engaging in large meta-analysis of GeneLab datasets, resulting in 10 publications (beyond the originally submitted research). Overall, the Open Science nature of GeneLab has resulted in a high degree of data re-use, resulting in 38 additional publications derived from the original 67 publication over the past four years. The enormous success and knowledge gained from GeneLab has led to a collection of sister NASA “Open Science Data Repositories (OSDR)” and research support groups. These include the NASA Ames Life Sciences Data Archive (ALSDA), the NASA Biological Institutional Scientific Collection (NBISC), and the Biospecimen Sharing Program (BSP). All are adopting the GeneLab data architecture system to maximize open-access, find-ability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR). ALSDA collects and curates phenotypic-physiological bioimaging-behavioral data from space and space-relevant non-human experiments, oftentimes coming from the same omics-associated experimental datasets found in GeneLab. Since 2021, a community of ~100 researchers have rallied around ALSDA, to provide feedback in a new ALSDA AWG focused on phenotypic-physiological investigation-sample-assay metadata standards (e.g., Micro-Computed Tomography, Light/Fluorescence Microscopy, Western Blot, Flow Cytometry, Novel Object Recognition, Elevated Plus Maze, etc. of ~50 assays collected). These standards are part of a new single point-of-entry data submission portal for all non-human Space Biology and Human Research Program principal investigators, to submit, curate, and share their research data. With open-access space biological data now collected and curated together with rich metadata, and with the potential for linkage to “big data” from the international biological and medical communities (NIH, EBI, etc.), the artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) era has started for Space Biology. Several other talks will cover these topics in this conference.

life sciences↗

NASA NTRS1990

Spaceport aurora: An orbiting transportation node

With recent announcements of the development of permanently staffed facilities on the Moon and Mars, the national space plan is in need of an infrastructure system for transportation and maintenance. A project team at the University of Houston College of Architecture and the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture, recently examined components for a low Earth orbit (LEO) transportation node that supports a lunar build-up scenario. Areas of investigation included identifying transportation node functions, identifying existing space systems and subsystems, analyzing variable orbits, determining logistics strategies for maintenance, and investigating assured crew return systems. The information resulted in a requirements definition document, from which the team then addressed conceptual designs for a LEO transportation node. The primary design drivers included: orbital stability, maximizing human performance and safety, vehicle maintainability, and modularity within existing space infrastructure. For orbital stability, the power tower configuration provides a gravity gradient stabilized facility and serves as the backbone for the various facility components. To maximize human performance, human comfort is stressed through zoning of living and working activities, maintaining a consistent local vertical orientation, providing crew interaction and viewing areas and providing crew return vehicles. Vehicle maintainability is accomplished through dual hangars, dual work cupolas, work modules, telerobotics and a fuel depot. Modularity is incorporated using Space Station Freedom module diameter, Space Station Freedom standard racks, and interchangeable interior partitions. It is intended that the final design be flexible and adaptable to provide a facility prototype that can service multiple mission profiles using modular space systems.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1992

Experimenter's laboratory for visualized interactive science

The science activities of the 1990's will require the analysis of complex phenomena and large diverse sets of data. In order to meet these needs, we must take advantage of advanced user interaction techniques: modern user interface tools; visualization capabilities; affordable, high performance graphics workstations; and interoperable data standards and translator. To meet these needs, we propose to adopt and upgrade several existing tools and systems to create an experimenter's laboratory for visualized interactive science. Intuitive human-computer interaction techniques have already been developed and demonstrated at the University of Colorado. A Transportable Applications Executive (TAE+), developed at GSFC, is a powerful user interface tool for general purpose applications. A 3D visualization package developed by NCAR provides both color shaded surface displays and volumetric rendering in either index or true color. The Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) data access library developed by Unidata supports creation, access and sharing of scientific data in a form that is self-describing and network transparent. The combination and enhancement of these packages constitutes a powerful experimenter's laboratory capable of meeting key science needs of the 1990's. This proposal encompasses the work required to build and demonstrate this capability.

Hansen, Elaine R.↗