SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Subject Matter Expert”

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 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Frictionless knowledge injection for few-shot learning

Cutting-edge machine learning methods often require large volumes of curated training data, precluding their use in national security problems with rare events in massive datasets. We present a method for incorporating abstract knowledge into models tailored for sparse data. A subject matter expert defines salient concepts using data examples, which are encoded in the model’s embedding space. Models are then trained to respect these concepts. This method enables knowledge injection, yielding effective models with limited labeled data and the ability to assess model sensitivity for subject matter expertise across the nonproliferation mission space, as demonstrated with Raman spectra analysis.

Stomps, Jordan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000178114479)↗

NASA NTRS2017

Ask-the-expert: Active Learning Based Knowledge Discovery Using the Expert

Often the manual review of large data sets, either for purposes of labeling unlabeled instances or for classifying meaningful results from uninteresting (but statistically significant) ones is extremely resource intensive, especially in terms of subject matter expert (SME) time. Use of active learning has been shown to diminish this review time significantly. However, since active learning is an iterative process of learning a classifier based on a small number of SME-provided labels at each iteration, the lack of an enabling tool can hinder the process of adoption of these technologies in real-life, in spite of their labor-saving potential. In this demo we present ASK-the-Expert, an interactive tool that allows SMEs to review instances from a data set and provide labels within a single framework. ASK-the-Expert is powered by an active learning algorithm for training a classifier in the backend. We demonstrate this system in the context of an aviation safety application, but the tool can be adopted to work as a simple review and labeling tool as well, without the use of active learning.

software↗

NASA NTRS2017

Ask-the-Expert: Active Learning Based Knowledge Discovery Using the Expert

Often the manual review of large data sets, either for purposes of labeling unlabeled instances or for classifying meaningful results from uninteresting (but statistically significant) ones is extremely resource intensive, especially in terms of subject matter expert (SME) time. Use of active learning has been shown to diminish this review time significantly. However, since active learning is an iterative process of learning a classifier based on a small number of SME-provided labels at each iteration, the lack of an enabling tool can hinder the process of adoption of these technologies in real-life, in spite of their labor-saving potential. In this demo we present ASK-the-Expert, an interactive tool that allows SMEs to review instances from a data set and provide labels within a single framework. ASK-the-Expert is powered by an active learning algorithm for training a classifier in the back end. We demonstrate this system in the context of an aviation safety application, but the tool can be adopted to work as a simple review and labeling tool as well, without the use of active learning.

GUI↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2021 CMH-17 Vol 5 Virtual Meeting CMC M&P Brief Overview

This overview (several slides) describes 1) the overall Goals of the CMH-17 Vol 5 CMC M&P (Materials and Processes) Working Group, 2) M&P sections in the existing CMH-17 Vol 5A that have been targeted for updating, 3) challenges to updating that content for the next edition of Vol 5, and 4) M&P plans for updating CMH-17 Vol 5A. M&P Working Group chairs Kiser and Lehman are leading a group of technical experts to address the sections that require the most attention in terms of updating information. A virtual meeting is providing an opportunity to recruit CMC, fiber, and EBC technical experts to address those sections. Goals will be defined for completing the updating of those sections, taking into account the need to have the updated content reviewed by SME (subject matter experts) well in advance of the publishing date.

Environmental Barrier Coating (EBC)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Scheduling Performance

As NASA considers long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs), it is envisioned that crew will behave more autonomously as compared to low-Earth orbit missions. The necessary shift of Ops Planners’ complete management of scheduling and planning to provide flexibility for crew to manage their own schedule in real-time requires significant research and investigation in evaluation of concepts of operations, of software tools to support tasks, and of crew performance to complete scheduling tasks. Our research objective is to characterize the human performance envelope for the task of planning and scheduling (crew self-scheduling), develop countermeasures to mitigate adverse performance effects due to plan complexity, and inform performance standards and guidelines based on research results. In our efforts to understand and characterize scheduling performance of crew members, we have conducted subject matter expert interviews to obtain feedback on scheduling plan complexity drivers and plan goodness. Following the pilot study conducted last year, we designed a study and have begun remote human subject testing to evaluate non-expert human performance, workload, and situational awareness for the task of planning and scheduling. This study investigates the effects of the number and type of constraints on human performance, and the differences in scheduling metrics between scheduling and rescheduling tasks. Subject testing is currently in progress, and we aim to collect data from approximately thirty subjects. We will summarize the methods used and impacts of the number and type of scheduling constraints. We will also present lessons learned as well as relevant results of the study.

crew scheduling↗

NASA NTRS2024

Assessment Of Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) as Related to Decompression Sickness (DCS) in the Spaceflight Environment and During Ground Testing

This publication documents the outcome of subject matter experts assessment of the status and progress of research and clinical activities intended to mitigate the risk of DCS issues related to PFO during spaceflight and associated ground testing and human subject studies.

Standards↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

HRP Data Management Plan

The purpose of Human Research Program Data Management Plan (DMP) is to define the processes and activities required for the overall management of the research data collected and managed by HRP throughout their life cycle. New updates to the Data Management Plan in 2023 include 1. CAPABILITIES AND SERVICES Data Repositories. Principal Investigators (PIs) funded by HRP may be asked to submit data to one of several NASA data repositories. HRP archives data in the NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP) that it considers to be unique and high value. This includes data from human subjects in space flight (ISS and commercial flights) and ground analogs to spaceflight; spaceflight tech demos involving humans; human omics data including the microbiome; parabolic flight studies; and the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL). The Open Science Data Repository (OSDR) includes The Ames Life Sciences Data Archive (ALSDA), used to archive non-human biological data (e.g., animal) generated by the Human Research program, and GeneLab, available to HRP PIs to archive non-human omics data. Catalog for search and retrieval. A catalog of non-human HRP life science experiments, with all associated descriptions (mission, payload, hardware, and personnel related information), and biospecimens is provided on the NLSP public web site for search and retrieval. 2. IRB ROLE IN RETURN OF INDIVIDUAL RESEARCH RESULTS The NASA IRB manages the process for incidental findings and for returning results to subjects for studies for which NASA IRB is the IRB of record. Omics data, especially genomics data, may generate information significant to the health of or risk to a research subject. These data potentially hold the keys to understand lifetime risks of chronic diseases, such as cancer, as well as risks associated with exposures common in space flight. 3. UPDATE OF TERMS – IDENTIFIABLE AND ATTRIBUTABLE DATA HRP now follows Federal and NASA policy by using “identifiable” instead of “attributable” for Personally Identifiable Information (PII). 4. POLICY ABOUT INTERNAL NON-RESEARCH USE OF DATA The HRP Chief Scientist grants access to data from HRP-funded research for non-research internal use that includes program management, customer facilitation, strategic planning, and risk research planning. Typical HRP personnel granted access to HRP research data for internal use include the Element Scientist, Subject Matter Experts (SME), and Data/bioinformatics Scientists. If data accessed for Internal Use is provided to an intramural or extramural scientist for hypothesis driven research, all Federal and NASA regulations (e.g., IRB review) regarding human subject research apply.

Data Management Plan↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Derivation of Capabilities and Resources for Treating Medical Conditions in Deep Space

BACKGROUND: Medical care in spaceflight requires the adaptation of terrestrial standards to the constraints of the space environment. However, there is often conflict between the ideal resources required for treatment and diagnosis of a medical condition, and the constraints on their mass, volume, data needs, etc. This optimization of trades between medical risk and resources will be a significant challenge for deep space medical system design. METHODS: A team of physicians with a broad range of expertise reviewed the 120 medical conditions on the condition list for NASA’s Informing Mission Planning via analysis of Complex Tradespaces Medical Database (IMPACT-MD). Each team member was assigned a subset of conditions based on their experience and training. The assigned physician generated a proposed list of capabilities, definitions, and resources required to treat each condition based on terrestrial practice guidelines, medical literature, and subject matter expertise. Additional specialists were consulted for conditions where expertise was not present within the main group. The proposed list was then reviewed by the broader team and modified as needed to achieve consensus. Each capability and resource was then assigned parameters to define quantity required per medical event, necessity, training level required, and primacy order of any alternative resources. These capabilities and resources were placed into condition specific tables and delivered to a team of engineers who added mass and volume data for each specific resource and converted the table into a database for use as input to a computational model to simulate spaceflight (IMPACT) DISCUSSION: This process ensures that a minimum of three subject matter experts review and agree upon the scope of practice, medical diagnostic tools, and treatment modalities that would be necessary to address emergent and non-emergent conditions that may arise during spaceflight to inform requirements during the vehicle design phase. The method is scalable to any design reference mission and permits modification of the existing database as information, conditions or experience are added. By including specialists, generalists, and those with subject matter expertise in the spaceflight environment on the team, we ensure that the included capabilities represent a realistic and actionable foundation for planning deep space missions.

D R Levin↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis for Identification of Top Injury Risks in Lunar Missions and Training

A new Exploration Extravehicular Activity Services (xEVAS) suit is being designed to replace the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Artemis program to return astronauts to the lunar surface. This new suit will allow for increased range of motion compared to the current EMU and Apollo era suits and additional features will enhance the health and safety of exploration. With the design of lunar missions and the xEVAS suit progressing, it is important to consider possible injuries and injury mechanisms that could occur in the suit. To address these concerns, the suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis (IMEA) was developed to outline suited injury scenarios and rank them based on risk score. The IMEA documents possible scenarios and underlying mechanisms of injury. History has shown that more suit injuries occur during training than in flight; therefore, currently planned training events to prepare for lunar missions and tasks during lunar surface EVAs were considered. Each scenario is ranked with likelihood and consequence scorings based on our current understanding of suit and application of Artemis design reference missions. The scoring allowed identification of the high-risk cases that will drive further work in suited injury. Mechanisms of injury, injury outcomes, and mitigation strategies are evaluated within each scenario. The Suited Injury Summit was held on January 5, 2022, to vet the IMEA with external experts. This was an all-day virtual meeting with the suited injury team; ergonomists; suit engineers; safety engineers; the flight operations directorate; flight doctors; astronauts; astronaut strength, conditioning, and rehabilitation specialists (ASCRS); and external subject matter experts (SMEs). External SMEs consisted of surgeons with varying specialties. The intent of this meeting was to walk through the top injury risks identified in the analysis, identify any gaps that were not captured, and discuss mitigations. With participation from all groups, countless lessons-learned came from the Summit meeting. Using these, the top 10 risks have been identified: neutral buoyancy laboratory training, hand/glove injuries, poor suit fit, field training, specific EVA tasks/design of task, boots/ankle injuries, falls from heights, background radiation, repetitive contact, and ambulation/longdistance ambulation. Mitigation steps have also been determined for each of the top risks. The IMEA and documentation of top risks is a living document. Yearly meetings are planned to update the analysis and reevaluate top risks and mitigations. The IMEA is being used to drive work in suited injury, and this work will continue to evolve with IMEA and lunar mission updates.

Teresa Reiber↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis for Identification of Top Injury Risks in Lunar Missions and Training

A new Exploration Extravehicular Activity Suit (xEVAS) is being designed to replace the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Artemis program to return astronauts to the lunar surface. This new suit will allow for increased range of motion compared the current EMU and Apollo era suits and will have additional features that will enhance the health and safety of exploration. With the design of lunar missions and the xEVAS progressing, it is important to consider possible injuries and injury mechanisms that could occur in the suit. To address these concerns, the suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis (IMEA) was developed to outline suited injury scenarios and rank them based on risk score. The IMEA documents possible scenarios and underlying mechanisms of injury while wearing an extravehicular activity (EVA) suit. Tasks during lunar surface EVA as well as training events to prepare for lunar missions were considered as history has shown that more suit injuries occur during training than in flight. Each scenario is ranked with a consequence and likelihood scoring based on our current understanding of the suit and Artemis design reference missions to identify high-risk cases that will drive further work in suited injury. Injuries, mechanisms of injury, and mitigation strategies are evaluated within each scenario. The Suited Injury Summit was held on January 5, 2022, to vet the IMEA with external experts. This was an all-day virtual meeting with the suited injury team, ergonomists, suit engineers, safety engineers, the flight operations directorate, flight doctors, astronauts, astronaut strength, conditioning, and rehabilitation specialists (ASCRS), and external subject matter experts (SMEs). External SMEs consisted of surgeons with varying specialties. The intent of this meeting was to walk through the top injury risks identified in the analysis, identify any gaps that were not captured, and discuss mitigations. With participation from all groups, countless lessons-learned came from the Summit meeting. Using the lessons-learned and discussion from the Summit, the top 10 risks have been identified: neutral buoyancy laboratory training, hand/glove injuries, poor suit fit, field training, specific EVA tasks/design of task, boots/ankle injuries, falls from heights, background radiation, repetitive contact, and ambulation/long-distance ambulation. Mitigation steps have also been determined for each of the top risks. The IMEA and documentation of top risks is a living document. Yearly meetings are planned to update the analysis and reevaluate top risks and mitigations. The IMEA is being used to drive work in suited injury, and this work will continue to evolve with IMEA and lunar mission updates.

Teresa Reiber↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis for Identification of Top Injury Risks in Lunar Missions and Training

Tessa Reiber↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NSCOR for Evaluating Risk Factors and Biomarkers for Adaptation and Resilience to Spaceflight: Emotional Valence and Social Processes in ICC/ICE Environments

Space exploration class missions, such as a mission to Mars, will require optimization of human performance, adaptability, and resilience. This NASA Specialized Center of Research (NSCOR) utilizes the NIMH Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework to identify biological and behavioral markers of individual social adaptation and emotional resilience (as well as vulnerability) to spaceflight-relevant stressors such as living in extended isolation. The overarching goal of this NSCOR is to obtain novel information to help identify biomarkers of individuals who are resilient and/or adaptable to the stressors of isolated, confined, and controlled (ICC) and isolated, confined, and extreme (ICE) environments.A total of N=90 healthy adult astronaut surrogates are being studied in three spaceflight-analog environments: (1) n=40 healthy adults in the Isolation and Confinement Analog Research Unit (ICARUS), an ICC at the University of Pennsylvania, during 7-day missions, for a target total of 280 subject days; (2) n=32 healthy adult astronaut surrogates studied in NASA’s Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA), an ICC at Johnson Space Center during 45-day missions, for a target total of 2,112 subject days; and (3) n=18 healthy adults in the Alfred-Wegener-Institute’s Neumayer Station III, an ICE in Antarctica, during 14-month missions, for a target total of 7,560 subject days. Dr. Nindl’s Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh is analyzing a priori selected protein biomarkers in blood, saliva, and urine. Complementary rodent models of exposure to early life stressors, confinement, and isolation are being evaluated at Dr. Hensch’s Laboratory to further validate the neurobehavioral and biological findings from the human studies.Given the inconsistency and varied definition of resilience/adaptation in the scientific literature, the NSCOR team developed a composite resilience/adaptation measure that reflects the most relevant outcomes to resilience/adaptation across psychosocial and neurobehavioral functions, as well as neurocognitive and spaceflight-relevant operational performance. To achieve this, group consensus was attained from subject matter experts to produce a rank-order of importance for each input variable. The final resilience/adaptation score included 36 variables that were collected across spaceflight analogs. As of 10/1/2021, the NSCOR project acquired data on n=27 subjects at ICARUS, n=16 at HERA, and n=18 at Neumayer. The COVID-19 pandemic delayed data acquisition at ICARUS and HERA.Among subjects studied to date, 99% of neural and neurobehavioral data (e.g., neuroimaging for structure and function, behavioral measures) as well as blood, saliva, and urine for biochemical assays have been acquired. For rodent models, Dr. Hensch’s laboratory has established biochemical and behavioral parameters reflecting confinement stress in social networks of mice for comparison to stress responses in the human spaceflight analog environments.Group social behaviors were measured with a Social Network Analysis (SNA) approach to define objective parameters associated with sociability and its plasticity by sex. This analytic approach may help identify a network of individuals who are more effective teammates or more likely to generate new social relationships. Data acquisition, biomarker assessment, and data quality control will continue through September 2022.

D F Dinges↗

DOE OSTI2021

Domestic Extremism: Countering the Threat Posed to Critical Assets

Domestic extremism has been a growing concern in the United States in recent months, as illustrated in multiple bulletins from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) warning law enforcement partners of the heightened threat. As concerns about these actors grows, it is important that facilities in the U.S. and internationally that protect critical assets, such as sensitive information, hazardous materials, or critical infrastructure, have effective methods in place to secure those assets. DE has challenged security systems through the threat of insider attack and violence, creating a new threat to be countered in the Office of Radiological Security’s radiological source security mission. In this effort, we used a literature review and focus group discussions with experts in critical asset security and extremism to understand the nature of the domestic extremist threat, to identify best practices in securing assets, recognize potential gaps in security measures to be corrected, and recommend actions and next steps. Twenty-two subject matter experts participated in a series of five focus group sessions. Questions focused on definitions of domestic extremism, potential changes in the threat, best practices in securing facilities, assets, and personnel, and any perceived gaps. Upon completion of the focus groups, notes were analyzed thematically to identify any recurring patterns in the results. In addition, a review of academic, industry, and government literature was conducted to understand the threat, describe the process of radicalization to extremism, and to identify empirically informed practices in prevention and response. Results of this project demonstrated that further work is needed to define domestic extremism in law, regulation, and policy, to help the U.S. develop a consistent response to the threat within organizations. This is especially important, as SMEs emphasized the need for early intervention in prevention efforts, noting that organizations need clear guidance on when and how to intervene. In addition, the need for social media monitoring was discussed, although challenges remain to do so with appropriate respect for privacy and civil liberties concerns.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

NASA NTRS2016

Advanced Technologies for Robotic Exploration Leading to Human Exploration: Results from the SpaceOps 2015 Workshop

This paper will provide a summary and analysis of the SpaceOps 2015 Workshop all-day session on "Advanced Technologies for Robotic Exploration, Leading to Human Exploration", held at Fucino Space Center, Italy on June 12th, 2015. The session was primarily intended to explore how robotic missions and robotics technologies more generally can help lead to human exploration missions. The session included a wide range of presentations that were roughly grouped into (1) broader background, conceptual, and high-level operations concepts presentations such as the International Space Exploration Coordination Group Roadmap, followed by (2) more detailed narrower presentations such as rover autonomy and communications. The broader presentations helped to provide context and specific technical hooks, and helped lay a foundation for the narrower presentations on more specific challenges and technologies, as well as for the discussion that followed. The discussion that followed the presentations touched on key questions, themes, actions and potential international collaboration opportunities. Some of the themes that were touched on were (1) multi-agent systems, (2) decentralized command and control, (3) autonomy, (4) low-latency teleoperations, (5) science operations, (6) communications, (7) technology pull vs. technology push, and (8) the roles and challenges of operations in early human architecture and mission concept formulation. A number of potential action items resulted from the workshop session, including: (1) using CCSDS as a further collaboration mechanism for human mission operations, (2) making further contact with subject matter experts, (3) initiating informal collaborative efforts to allow for rapid and efficient implementation, and (4) exploring how SpaceOps can support collaboration and information exchange with human exploration efforts. This paper will summarize the session and provide an overview of the above subjects as they emerged from the SpaceOps 2015 Workshop session.

space operations↗

NASA NTRS2012

Safety Risk Knowledge Elicitation in Support of Aeronautical R and D Portfolio Management: A Case Study

Aviation is a problem domain characterized by a high level of system complexity and uncertainty. Safety risk analysis in such a domain is especially challenging given the multitude of operations and diverse stakeholders. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) projects that by 2025 air traffic will increase by more than 50 percent with 1.1 billion passengers a year and more than 85,000 flights every 24 hours contributing to further delays and congestion in the sky (Circelli, 2011). This increased system complexity necessitates the application of structured safety risk analysis methods to understand and eliminate where possible, reduce, and/or mitigate risk factors. The use of expert judgments for probabilistic safety analysis in such a complex domain is necessary especially when evaluating the projected impact of future technologies, capabilities, and procedures for which current operational data may be scarce. Management of an R&D product portfolio in such a dynamic domain needs a systematic process to elicit these expert judgments, process modeling results, perform sensitivity analyses, and efficiently communicate the modeling results to decision makers. In this paper a case study focusing on the application of an R&D portfolio of aeronautical products intended to mitigate aircraft Loss of Control (LOC) accidents is presented. In particular, the knowledge elicitation process with three subject matter experts who contributed to the safety risk model is emphasized. The application and refinement of a verbal-numerical scale for conditional probability elicitation in a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) is discussed. The preliminary findings from this initial step of a three-part elicitation are important to project management practitioners as they illustrate the vital contribution of systematic knowledge elicitation in complex domains.

Shih, Ann T.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Ask-The-Expert: Minimizing Human Review for Big Data Analytics Through Active Learning

In this CIF project, we worked toward semi-automating knowledge discovery from anomaly detection algorithms through the use of active learning. Active learning is an area of research within machine learning that uses an "expert in the loop" to learn from large data sets that have very few annotations or labels available, and where providing such labels is expensive. In our case, the task can be defined as the identification of safety events from flight operational data. Since traditional anomaly detection algorithms cannot differentiate between operationally relevant and irrelevant statistical anomalies, Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) have a lengthy and expensive burden of investigating every example identified by the detection algorithm, classifying and labeling them as relevant or irrelevant. Active learningidentifies the unlabeled example for which a label would most improve the classifier, asks the domain expert for a label, and repeats this process until there are no more resources (time, budget) available for labeling or a minimum required performance is reached. A positive label indicates an operationally significant safety event whereas a negative label indicates otherwise. Based on these few labels we propose to build an active learning system that utilizes the SME's time in the most effective manner by iteratively asking for labels for as few informative instances as possible. Our work was proposed to be a stepping stone toward implementation and deployment of the system with user interface to be pursued by the Aviation Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) given its interest in safety monitoring and discovery of safety incidents.

aviation safety↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Earth Independent Medical Operations (EIMO)

Inherent in interplanetary space travel are unprecedented challenges that could threaten mission success and negatively impact crew health and performance. Return to definitive care is essentially untenable and resources will be constrained with practically no re-supply capability. Access to ground-based medical expertise will be significantly delayed under nominal conditions with exacerbation during conjunction or prolonged dust storms. Taken together, these challenges necessitate the development of a progressively autonomous medical operational support system to assist the crew medical officer (CMO). While support from ground based medical experts will remain indispensable for pre-mission planning, the approach to management of acute/emergent medical contingencies will require a gradual transition of medical care and decision making from terrestrial to space-based assets, enabling support of astronaut health and performance and reducing overall mission risk. To progressively enable EIMO, a series of meetings were convened with subject matter experts from within NASA, academia and industry to facilitate mapping of the path to support autonomous medical operations. Topics explored in these meetings included the scope of data (storage capacity, usage, transmission rate and bandwidth, computing capacity), CMO training, supply and resource management and task load balance. Recommendations from these meetings will inform the EIMO Concept of Operations and definition of the associated requirements culminating in updates to the NASA 3001 standards. The EIMO project team will work with stakeholders to conceptualize a clinical decision support system (CDSS) to assist the CMO in response to medical contingencies when terrestrial support is delayed or otherwise unavailable. The CDSS will be a system of systems that will utilize data from numerous input vectors. Successful deployment of the CDSS will facilitate medical decision making while decreasing the cognitive load leading to an improvement in task load balancing. Additional benefits of the envisioned CDSS include assistance with inventory management, locating resources, storage/retrieval of medical records, highlighting trends in recorded data, in addition to providing a consult for diagnosis and treatment. More advanced features might include passive monitoring to identify early warning signs of behavioral or medical anomalies to possibly pre-empt onset of conditions that would compromise crew health and performance.

Benjamin Easter↗

NASA NTRS2021

LMI Automated Air Cargo Operations Market Research and Forecast

Air cargo companies and aircraft manufacturers are making significant investments to enable the movement of cargo via various levels of automated aircraft, such as aircraft with simplified operations requiring a pilot, remotely monitored or piloted aircraft, and fully autonomous aircraft. These investments will enable greater utilization of aircraft while unlocking new air markets traditionally served by ground transportation only. Many cargo companies and aerospace experts envision an operating environment where a single pilot can remotely pilot numerous aircraft for significant increases in aircraft utilization. The future operating environment is also expected to include air cargo companies flying smaller aircraft from airports and distribution centers outside of major U.S. cities directly to city centers, avoiding congested roads and increasing the velocity of cargo shipments, particularly those that are high-value, time-sensitive, and security sensitive (e.g., pharmaceuticals). These are just a few benefits and use cases cargo companies and aerospace experts see with the advancement of automated aircraft. To better understand industry’s direction, NASA asked the LMI team to research the forecasted market, timeline, risks, and opportunities for integrating unmanned air cargo vehicles into the National Airspace System (NAS) for the development and prioritization of the NASA Air Traffic Management Exploration’s research portfolio. To begin the market assessment, we gathered data via numerous interviews with key stakeholders and subject matter experts and literature reviews. We then incorporated the data into a custom-developed systems dynamics model and visualization dashboard. The systems dynamics model classifies the size of the market (e.g., overall fleet size of automated aircraft) for four distinct use cases over the next 20 years. The model projects the year in which various types of automated aircraft will enter the commercial cargo market based on our team’s collective research on when the aircraft will become viable due to manufacturing and certification timelines and the lifespan of current, traditional aircraft in service, to name a few factors. While this report defines our team’s estimated timeline of entry and growth, the model is dynamic—it enables NASA users to change variables based on future-year events. If the necessary technology does not mature in accordance with our assumptions, then NASA can change the entry of service point to a future year to evaluate the changes in market size in the out years. This flexibility will be key to deciding when and how NASA should invest in various areas.

air traffic management↗