Results for “Crowdsourcing Data” — Page 3

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗

DOE OSTI2023

Assessing residential PM 2.5 concentrations and infiltration factors with high spatiotemporal resolution using crowdsourced sensors

Building conditions, outdoor climate, and human behavior influence residential concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). To study PM 2.5 spatiotemporal variability in residences, we acquired paired indoor and outdoor PM 2.5 measurements at 3,977 residences across the United States totaling >10,000 monitor-years of time-resolved data (10-min resolution) from the PurpleAir network. Time-series analysis and statistical modeling apportioned residential PM 2.5 concentrations to outdoor sources (median residential contribution = 52% of total, coefficient of variation = 69%), episodic indoor emission events such as cooking (28%, CV = 210%) and persistent indoor sources (20%, CV = 112%). Residences in the temperate marine climate zone experienced higher infiltration factors, consistent with expectations for more time with open windows in milder climates. Likewise, for all climate zones, infiltration factors were highest in summer and lowest in winter, decreasing by approximately half in most climate zones. Large outdoor–indoor temperature differences were associated with lower infiltration factors, suggesting particle losses from active filtration occurred during heating and cooling. Absolute contributions from both outdoor and indoor sources increased during wildfire events. Infiltration factors decreased during periods of high outdoor PM 2.5 , such as during wildfires, reducing potential exposures from outdoor-origin particles but increasing potential exposures to indoor-origin particles. Time-of-day analysis reveals that episodic emission events are most frequent during mealtimes as well as on holidays (Thanksgiving and Christmas), indicating that cooking-related activities are a strong episodic emission source of indoor PM 2.5 in monitored residences.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Crowdsourcing the Frontier: Advancing Hybrid Physics‐ML Climate Simulation via a $\$$50,000 Kaggle Competition

Subgrid machine-learning (machine learning [ML]) parameterizations have the potential to introduce a new generation of climate models that incorporate the effects of higher-resolution physics without incurring the prohibitive computational cost associated with more explicit physics-based simulations. However, important issues, ranging from online instability to inconsistent online performance, have limited their operational use for long-term climate projections. To more rapidly drive progress in solving these issues, domain scientists and ML researchers opened up the offline aspect of this problem to the broader ML and data science community with the release of ClimSim, a NeurIPS Data sets and Benchmarks publication, and an associated Kaggle competition. This paper reports on the downstream results of the Kaggle competition by coupling emulators inspired by the winning teams' architectures to an interactive climate model (including full cloud microphysics, a regime historically prone to online instability) and systematically evaluating their online performance. Our results demonstrate that online stability in the low-resolution real-geography setting is reproducible across multiple diverse architectures, which we consider a key milestone. All tested architectures exhibit strikingly similar offline and online biases, though their responses to architecture-agnostic design choices (e.g., expanding the list of input variables) can differ significantly. Multiple Kaggle-inspired architectures achieve state-of-the-art results on certain metrics such as zonal mean bias patterns and global Root Mean Squared Error, indicating that crowdsourcing the essence of the offline problem is one path to improving online performance in hybrid physics-AI climate simulation.

Environmental sciences↗

NASA NTRS2015

Citizen Science

Scientists and engineers constantly face new challenges, despite myriad advances in computing. More sets of data are collected today from earth and sky than there is time or resources available to carefully analyze them. Some problems either don't have fast algorithms to solve them or have solutions that must be found among millions of options, a situation akin to finding a needle in a haystack. But all hope is not lost: advances in technology and the Internet have empowered the general public to participate in the scientific process via individual computational resources and brain cognition, which isn't matched by any machine. Citizen scientists are volunteers who perform scientific work by making observations, collecting and disseminating data, making measurements, and analyzing or interpreting data without necessarily having any scientific training. In so doing, individuals from all over the world can contribute to science in ways that wouldn't have been otherwise possible.

distributed computing↗

DOE OSTI2022

Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) Science to Advance the Geosciences: Introduction and Synthesis of a Special Collection of Commentary Articles

Abstract The sciences struggle to integrate across disciplines, coordinate across data generation and modeling activities, produce connected open data, and build strong networks to engage stakeholders within and beyond the scientific community. The American Geophysical Union (AGU) is divided into 25 sections intended to encompass the breadth of the geosciences. Here, we introduce a special collection of commentary articles spanning 19 AGU sections on challenges and opportunities associated with the use of ICON science principles. These principles focus on research intentionally designed to be Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) with the goal of maximizing mutual benefit (among stakeholders) and cross‐system transferability of science outcomes. This article (a) summarizes the ICON principles; (b) discusses the crowdsourced approach to creating the collection; (c) explores insights from across the articles; and (d) proposes steps forward. There were common themes among the commentary articles, including broad agreement that the benefits of using ICON principles outweigh the costs, but that using ICON principles has important risks that need to be understood and mitigated. It was also clear that the ICON principles are not monolithic or static, but should instead be considered a heuristic tool that can and should be modified to meet changing needs. As a whole, the collection is intended as a resource for scientists pursuing ICON science and represents an important inflection point in which the geosciences community has come together to offer insights into ICON principles as a unified approach for improving how science is done across the geosciences and beyond.

Goldman, A. E.↗

DOE OSTI2021

Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) Science to Advance the Geosciences: Introduction and Synthesis of a Special Collection of Commentary Articles

The sciences struggle with poor integration across disciplines, the absence of coordination within and across data generation and modeling activities, scarce or disconnected open data, and weaknesses of networks to engage diverse stakeholders within and beyond the scientific community. The American Geophysical Union (AGU) is divided into 25 sections intended to encompass the breadth of the geosciences. Here, we introduce a special collection of commentary articles spanning 19 AGU sections on the challenges and opportunities associated with the use of ICON science principles. These principles focus on research intentionally designed to be Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) with the goal of maximizing mutual benefit (among stakeholders) and cross-system transferability of science outcomes. This article summarizes the ICON principles; discusses the crowdsourced approach to creating the collection; and explores insights from across the articles. There were multiple common themes among the commentary articles, including the broad agreement that the benefits of using ICON principles outweigh the costs, but that using ICON principles has important risks that need to be understood and mitigated. It was also clear that the ICON principles are not monolithic or static, but should instead be considered a heuristic tool that can and should be modified to meet changing needs. As a whole, the collection is intended as a resource for scientists pursuing ICON science and represents an important inflection point in which the geosciences community has come together around ICON principles as a unified approach for improving how science is done across the geosciences and beyond.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Crew Seat for Human Exploration in Multiple Gravity Environments

This work attempts to develop a single crew seating solution that is applicable across a range of gravity environments encountered by spacecraft proposed in several conceptual spacecraft architectures. All of these spacecraft will need to provide some sort of stationary accommodation for the crew for performing various activities such as work in science laboratories, maintenance and repair facilities, medical care facilities, and spacecraft operations centers, as well as for basic habitation in crew quarters, entertainment / relaxation facilities, and crew dining facilities. Depending on the spacecraft or architecture, this stationary accommodation may be experienced continuously in microgravity, such as would be the case for the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Alternately, it could be in continuous lunar or Martian gravity, such as the Common Habitat base camps. It could experience fractional gravity, such as a Pressurized Rover for In-Space Missions at a Near Earth Asteroid or one of the Martian moons. It could alternate between artificial gravity and microgravity, such as the Nautilus-X. It could alternate between microgravity and lunar or Martian gravity, such as the SpaceX Starship Human Landing System or the Blue Origin Blue Moon Block 2 Human Landing System. Or it could be in continuous Earth gravity, such as ground trainer systems. Prior human spaceflight systems for stationary accommodation have been focused on microgravity applications. These systems have their own limitations and cannot be used in a gravity environment. A public crowdsourcing campaign generated dozens of ideas, which ultimately generated a Gecko Mobility Aids system for crew translation and the Multi-Gravity Crew Seat (MGCS) for stationary accommodation. The MGCS functions in gravity as a traditional terrestrial seat, performing functions of load for the overall body and forearms, as well as head and neck load relief while positioning the body within range of an intended task. In microgravity, the MGCS functions as a body restraint, securing the body against inadvertent drifting by applying a restraining pressure at the front and back of the thighs, shoulders, and back. The initial MGCS concept was developed in a NASA hackathon and was refined through a review of dozens of terrestrial seating styles. Additionally, a review of anthropometry and biomechanics data related to the neutral body posture was conducted to help inform the microgravity configuration of the MGCS. A series of CAD models were iteratively developed, with subject matter expert reviews leading to design improvements. A scale model was constructed and used with a humanoid model to demonstrate MGCS accommodation of a human-like body in both gravity and microgravity modes. Work to develop a full-scale protype of the MGCS is discussed, including design and fabrication of the headrest, arm rest, seat back, seat pan, seat base, and the conversion mechanisms. A 1-g human-in-the-loop evaluation of the prototype assessed the acceptability of performing seated activities in the MGCS, collecting data on the usability, comfort, and ease of ingress/egress. Based on the evaluation results, design modifications needed for reduced gravity testing are documented and initial work is indicated for a reduced gravity test plan.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗

DOE OSTI2023

Agile collaboration: Citizen science as a transdisciplinary approach to heliophysics

Citizen science connects scientists with the public to enable discovery, engaging broad audiences across the world. There are many attributes that make citizen science an asset to the field of heliophysics, including agile collaboration. Agility is the extent to which a person, group of people, technology, or project can work efficiently, pivot, and adapt to adversity. Citizen scientists are agile; they are adaptable and responsive. Citizen science projects and their underlying technology platforms are also agile in the software development sense, by utilizing beta testing and short timeframes to pivot in response to community needs. As they capture scientifically valuable data, citizen scientists can bring expertise from other fields to scientific teams. The impact of citizen science projects and communities means citizen scientists are a bridge between scientists and the public, facilitating the exchange of information. These attributes of citizen scientists form the framework of agile collaboration. In this paper, we contextualize agile collaboration primarily for aurora chasers, a group of citizen scientists actively engaged in projects and independent data gathering. Nevertheless, these insights scale across other domains and projects. Citizen science is an emerging yet proven way of enhancing the current research landscape. To tackle the next-generation’s biggest research problems, agile collaboration with citizen scientists will become necessary.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗