Members Can Post Anonymously On This Site
-
Similar Topics
-
By NASA
Center Director Dr. Jimmy Kenyon gives an overview of NASA Glenn Research Center’s areas of expertise and how it supports the agency’s missions and programs. Credit: NASA/Susan Valerian NASA Glenn Research Center’s Director Dr. Jimmy Kenyon and Chief Counsel Callista Puchmeyer participated in a local symposium that addressed the operational and legal challenges of human spaceflight. The one-day conference was held at the Cleveland State University (CSU) College of Law on Feb.13.
Kenyon gave a keynote that provided an overview of NASA Glenn’s areas of expertise and how the center supports the agency’s missions and programs. He also talked about the role of growing commercial partnerships at NASA.
Panelists, left to right: Col. (Ret.) Joseph Zeis, senior advisor for Aerospace and Defense, Office of the Governor of Ohio; Callista Puchmeyer, chief counsel, NASA’s Glenn Research Center; and Jon. P. Yormick, international business and trade attorney, Yormick Law, answer questions on operational and legal challenges of human spaceflight at a Cleveland State University College of Law symposium. Credit: NASA/Susan Valerian Puchmeyer, a graduate of CSU’s College of Law and recent inductee into its Hall of Fame, participated in a panel about Northeast Ohio’s aerospace industry and the legal aspects of commercial partnerships.
Additionally, human spaceflight experts from academia, law, and science spoke throughout the day on topics ranging from the health and training of astronauts to the special law of space stations. Romanian astronaut Dumitru-Dorin Prunariu joined remotely to provide a personal perspective.
Return to Newsletter Explore More
2 min read NASA Releases its Spinoff 2025 Publication
Article 4 mins ago 1 min read NASA Glenn Welcomes Spring 2025 Interns
Article 4 mins ago 5 min read NASA’s Chevron Technology Quiets the Skies
Article 22 hours ago View the full article
-
By NASA
6 min read
Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
Risks Concept Risk is inherent in human spaceflight. However, specific risks can and should be understood, managed, and mitigated to reduce threats posed to astronauts. Risk management in the context of human spaceflight can be viewed as a trade-based system. The relevant evidence in life sciences, medicine, and engineering is tracked and evaluated to identify ways to minimize overall risk to the astronauts and to ensure mission success. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) manages the process by which scientific evidence is utilized to establish and reassess the postures of the various risks to the Human System during all of the various types of existing or anticipated crewed missions. The HSRB operates as part of the Health and Medical Technical Authority of the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer of NASA via the JSC Chief Medical Officer.
The HSRB approaches to human system risks is analogous to the approach the engineering profession takes with its Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in that a process is utilized to identify and address potential problems, or failures to reduce their likelihood and severity. In the context of risks to the human system, the HSRB considers eight missions which different in their destinations and durations (known as Design Reference Missions [DRM]) to further refine the context of the risks. With each DRM a likelihood and consequence are assigned to each risk which is adjusted scientific evidence is accumulated and understanding of the risk is enhanced, and mitigations become available or are advanced.
Human System Risks This framework enables the principles of Continuous Risk Management and Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM) to be applied in an ongoing fashion to the challenges posed by Human System Risks. Using this framework consistently across the 29 risks allows management to see where risks need additional research or technology development to be mitigated or monitored and for the identification of new risks and concerns. Further information on the implementation of the risk management process can be found in the following documents:
Human System Risk Management Plan – JSC-66705 NASA Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Implementation – NPR 7120.11A NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements – NPR 7120.5 Human System Risk Board Management Office
The HSRB Risk Management Office governs the execution of the Human System Risk management process in support of the HSRB. It is led by the HSRB Chair, who is also referred to as the Risk Manager.
Risk Custodian Teams
Along with the Human System Risk Manager, a team of risk custodians (a researcher, an operational researcher or physician, and an epidemiologist, who each have specific expertise) works together to understand and synthesize scientific and operational evidence in the context of spaceflight, identify and evaluate metrics for each risk in order to communicate the risk posture to the agency.
Directed Acyclic Graphs
Summary
The HSRB uses Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG), a type of causal diagramming, as visual tools to create a shared understanding of the risks, improve communication among those stakeholders, and enable the creation of a composite risk network that is vetted by members of the NASA community and configuration managed (Antonsen et al., NASA/TM– 20220006812). The knowledge captured is the Human Health and Performance community’s knowledge about the causal flow of a human system risk, and the relationships that exist between the contributing factors to that risk.
DAGs are:
Intended to improve communication between: Managers and subject matter experts who need to discuss human system risks Subject matter experts in different disciplines where human system risks interact with one another in a potentially cumulative fashion Visual representations of known or suspected relationships Directed – the relationship flows in one direction between any two nodes Acyclic – cycles in the graph are not allowed Example of a Directed Acyclic Graph. This is a simplified illustration of how and the individual, the crew, and the system contribute to the likelihood of successful task performance in a mission. Individual readiness is affected by many of the health and performance-oriented risks followed by the HSRB, but the readiness of any individual crew is complemented by the team and the system that the crew works within. Failures of task performance may lead to loss of mission objectives if severe.NASA View Larger (Example of a Directed Acyclic Graph) Image
Details
At NASA, the Human System Risks have historically been conceptualized as deriving from five Hazards present in the spaceflight environment. These are: altered gravity, isolation and confinement, radiation, a hostile closed environment, and distance from Earth. These Hazards are aspects of the spaceflight environment that are encountered when someone is launched into space and therefore are the starting point for causal diagramming of spaceflight-related risk issues for the HSRB.
These Hazards are often interpreted in relation to physiologic changes that occur in humans as a result of the exposure; however, interaction between human crew (behavioral health and performance), which may be degraded due to the spaceflight environment – and the vehicle and mission systems that the crew must operate – can also be influenced by these Hazards.
Each Human System Risk DAG is intended to show the causal flow of risk from Hazards to Mission Level Outcomes. As such, the structure of each DAG starts with at least one Hazard and ends with at least one of the pre-defined Mission Level Outcomes. In between are the nodes and edges of the causal flow diagrams that are relevant to the Risk under consideration. These are called ‘contributing factors’ in the HSRB terminology, and include countermeasures, medical conditions, and other Human System Risks. A graph data structure is composed of a set of vertices (nodes), and a set of edges (links). Each edge represents a relationship between two nodes. There can be two types of relationships between nodes: directed and undirected. For example, if an edge exists between two nodes A and B and the edge is undirected, it is represented as A–B, (no arrow). If the edge were directed, for example from A to B, then this is represented with an arrow (A->B). Each directed arrow connecting one node to another on a DAG indicates a claim of causality. A directed graph can potentially contain a cycle, meaning that, from a specific node, there exists a path that would eventually return to that node. A directed graph that has no cycles is known as acyclic. Thus, a graph with directed links and no cycles is a DAG. DAGs are a type of network diagram that represent causality in a visual format.
DAGs are updated with the regular Human System Risk updates generally every 1-2 years. Approved DAGs can be found in the NASA/TP 20220015709 below or broken down under each Human System Risk.
Documents
Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation – NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks – NASA/TP 20220015709 Publications
npj Microgravity – Causal diagramming for assessing human
system risk in spaceflight
Apr 22, 2024
PDF (3.09 MB)
npj Microgravity –
Levels of evidence for human system risk
evaluation
Apr 22, 2024
PDF (2.47 MB)
npj Microgravity –
Updates to the NASA human system risk management process
for space exploration
Apr 22, 2024
PDF (2.24 MB)
Points of Contact
Mary Van Baalen
Dan Buckland
Bob Scully
Kim Lowe
Human System Risks Share
Details
Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 EditorRobert E. LewisLocationJohnson Space Center Related Terms
Human Health and Performance Human System Risks Explore More
1 min read Concern of Venous Thromboembolism
Article 31 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Acute and Chronic Carbon Dioxide Exposure
Article 30 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Adverse Cognitive or Behavioral Conditions and Psychiatric Disorders
Article 30 mins ago Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
Humans In Space
Missions
International Space Station
Solar System
View the full article
-
By NASA
An image of a coastal marshland combines aerial and satellite views in a technique similar to hyperspectral imaging. Combining data from multiple sources gives scientists information that can support environmental management.John Moisan When it comes to making real-time decisions about unfamiliar data – say, choosing a path to hike up a mountain you’ve never scaled before – existing artificial intelligence and machine learning tech doesn’t come close to measuring up to human skill. That’s why NASA scientist John Moisan is developing an AI “eye.”
Oceanographer John MoisanNASA Moisan, an oceanographer at NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility near Chincoteague, Virginia, said AI will direct his A-Eye, a movable sensor. After analyzing images his AI would not just find known patterns in new data, but also steer the sensor to observe and discover new features or biological processes.
“A truly intelligent machine needs to be able to recognize when it is faced with something truly new and worthy of further observation,” Moisan said. “Most AI applications are mapping applications trained with familiar data to recognize patterns in new data. How do you teach a machine to recognize something it doesn’t understand, stop and say ‘What was that? Let’s take a closer look.’ That’s discovery.”
Finding and identifying new patterns in complex data is still the domain of human scientists, and how humans see plays a large part, said Goddard AI expert James MacKinnon. Scientists analyze large data sets by looking at visualizations that can help bring out relationships between different variables within the data.
Infrared images like this one from a marsh area on the Maryland/Virginia Eastern Shore coastal barrier and back bay regions reveal clues to scientists about plant health, photosynthesis, and other conditions that affect vegetation and ecosystems.John Moisan It’s another story to train a computer to look at large data streams in real time to see those connections, MacKinnon said. Especially when looking for correlations and inter-relationships in the data that the computer hasn’t been trained to identify.
Moisan intends first to set his A-Eye on interpreting images from Earth’s complex aquatic and coastal regions. He expects to reach that goal this year, training the AI using observations from prior flights over the Delmarva Peninsula. Follow-up funding would help him complete the optical pointing goal.
“How do you pick out things that matter in a scan?” Moisan asked. “I want to be able to quickly point the A-Eye at something swept up in the scan, so that from a remote area we can get whatever we need to understand the environmental scene.”
Moisan’s on-board AI would scan the collected data in real-time to search for significant features, then steer an optical sensor to collect more detailed data in infrared and other frequencies.
Thinking machines may be set to play a larger role in future exploration of our universe. Sophisticated computers taught to recognize chemical signatures that could indicate life processes, or landscape features like lava flows or craters, might offer to increase the value of science data returned from lunar or deep-space exploration.
Today’s state-of-the-art AI is not quite ready to make mission-critical decisions, MacKinnon said.
“You need some way to take a perception of a scene and turn that into a decision and that’s really hard,” he said. “The scary thing, to a scientist, is to throw away data that could be valuable. An AI might prioritize what data to send first or have an algorithm that can call attention to anomalies, but at the end of the day, it’s going to be a scientist looking at that data that results in discoveries.”
Share
Details
Last Updated Feb 10, 2025 Related Terms
Goddard Space Flight Center Artificial Intelligence (AI) Goddard Technology People of Goddard Technology Wallops Flight Facility Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
Missions
Humans in Space
Climate Change
Solar System
View the full article
-
By NASA
3 Min Read NASA Scientists Find New Human-Caused Shifts in Global Water Cycle
Cracked mud and salt on the valley floor in Death Valley National Park in California can become a reflective pool after rains. (File photo) Credits: NPS/Kurt Moses In a recently published paper, NASA scientists use nearly 20 years of observations to show that the global water cycle is shifting in unprecedented ways. The majority of those shifts are driven by activities such as agriculture and could have impacts on ecosystems and water management, especially in certain regions.
“We established with data assimilation that human intervention in the global water cycle is more significant than we thought,” said Sujay Kumar, a research scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and a co-author of the paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The shifts have implications for people all over the world. Water management practices, such as designing infrastructure for floods or developing drought indicators for early warning systems, are often based on assumptions that the water cycle fluctuates only within a certain range, said Wanshu Nie, a research scientist at NASA Goddard and lead author of the paper.
“This may no longer hold true for some regions,” Nie said. “We hope that this research will serve as a guide map for improving how we assess water resources variability and plan for sustainable resource management, especially in areas where these changes are most significant.”
One example of the human impacts on the water cycle is in North China, which is experiencing an ongoing drought. But vegetation in many areas continues to thrive, partially because producers continue to irrigate their land by pumping more water from groundwater storage, Kumar said. Such interrelated human interventions often lead to complex effects on other water cycle variables, such as evapotranspiration and runoff.
Nie and her colleagues focused on three different kinds of shifts or changes in the cycle: first, a trend, such as a decrease in water in a groundwater reservoir; second, a shift in seasonality, like the typical growing season starting earlier in the year, or an earlier snowmelt; and third a change in extreme events, like “100-year floods” happening more frequently.
The scientists gathered remote sensing data from 2003 to 2020 from several different NASA satellite sources: the Global Precipitation Measurement mission satellite for precipitation data, a soil moisture dataset from the European Space Agency’s Climate Change Initiative, and the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment satellites for terrestrial water storage data. They also used products from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer satellite instrument to provide information on vegetation health.
“This paper combines several years of our team’s effort in developing capabilities on satellite data analysis, allowing us to precisely simulate continental water fluxes and storages across the planet,” said Augusto Getirana, a research scientist at NASA Goddard and a co-author of the paper.
The study results suggest that Earth system models used to simulate the future global water cycle should evolve to integrate the ongoing effects of human activities. With more data and improved models, producers and water resource managers could understand and effectively plan for what the “new normal” of their local water situation looks like, Nie said.
By Erica McNamee
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland
Share
Details
Last Updated Jan 16, 2025 EditorKate D. RamsayerContactKate D. Ramsayerkate.d.ramsayer@nasa.gov Related Terms
Earth Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Goddard Space Flight Center Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Water & Energy Cycle Explore More
4 min read NASA’s Global Precipitation Measurement Mission: 10 years, 10 stories
From peering into hurricanes to tracking El Niño-related floods and droughts to aiding in disaster…
Article 11 months ago 4 min read NASA Satellites Find Snow Didn’t Offset Southwest US Groundwater Loss
Article 7 months ago 4 min read NASA Satellites Reveal Abrupt Drop in Global Freshwater Levels
Earth’s total amount of freshwater dropped abruptly starting in May 2014 and has remained low…
Article 2 months ago View the full article
-
By NASA
Caption: An artist’s concept of the International Space Station orbiting Earth. In the distance is the Moon, and a red star representing Mars.Credit: NASA As part of the agency’s efforts to enable broader use of space, NASA has released its final goals and objectives for low Earth orbit, defining the long-term approach toward advancing microgravity science, technology, and exploration for the benefit of all. Developed with input from a wide range of stakeholders, NASA’s Low Earth Orbit Microgravity Strategy will guide the agency toward the next generation of continuous human presence in orbit, enable greater economic growth, and maintain international partnerships.
“As we near the retirement of the International Space Station in 2030, these objectives are a pivotal next step in solidifying U.S. leadership in space,” said NASA Deputy Administrator Pam Melroy. “Our consultation with industry, academia, and international partners has helped refine a visionary roadmap for our future in low Earth orbit, which will be enabled by a continuous human presence. Together, we are ensuring that the benefits of exploring space continue to grow – advancing science, innovation, and opportunities for all, while preparing for humanity’s next giant leap of exploring the Moon, Mars and beyond.”
In early 2024, NASA initiated a planning process that included drafting an initial set of goals and objectives for the low Earth orbit microgravity environment and seeking feedback from its workforce, government partners, industry, academia, international space agencies, and the public. The agency reviewed more than 1,800 comments and hosted two workshops, resulting in essential adjustments to the goals and objectives to better align with its partners. The final framework includes 13 goals and 44 objectives across seven key areas: commercial low Earth orbit infrastructure, operations, science, research and technology development for exploration, international cooperation, workforce development and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) engagement, and public engagement.
The agency’s efforts in low Earth orbit are integral to its broader ambitions for deep space exploration. The microgravity environment in low Earth orbit provides a cost-effective, easily accessible proving ground for technologies and research necessary for human missions to explore the solar system. With most of the journey to Moon and Mars occurring in microgravity, the objectives give the opportunity to continue vital human research, test future exploration systems, and retain the critical skills needed to operate in the microgravity environment.
“These finalized objectives represent a clear path forward as NASA transitions from the International Space Station to a new era of commercial space stations,” said Robyn Gatens, director of the International Space Station and acting director of commercial spaceflight. “Low Earth orbit will remain a hub for scientific discovery, technological advancement, and international cooperation, while making strategic investments in a commercial space ecosystem that benefits not just NASA, but the entire space community.”
The low Earth orbit microgravity goals and objectives, combined with significant stakeholder engagement, drive NASA’s need to maintain an unbroken, continuous heartbeat of humans in the commercial low Earth orbit destinations era. NASA requires long-duration flights to mitigate risk for future trips to the Red Planet. To ensure reliable access to and use of low Earth orbit, a diversity of providers operating on a regular cadence is essential. The objectives will also guide the development of requirements for future commercial space stations that will support NASA’s missions, while reducing risk for human missions to Mars, preserving operational skills, advancing critical scientific research, and sustaining engagement with international and commercial partners.
“Collaboration and consultation remain a cornerstone of our low Earth orbit strategy,” said John Keefe, director of cross-agency strategy integration at NASA. “The objectives we’ve established will help NASA craft a work plan that ensures NASA is positioned to meet current and future needs and prioritizes the development of critical capabilities for low Earth orbit.”
The low Earth orbit microgravity goals and objectives are available online at:
https://go.nasa.gov/3DsMtNI
-end-
Amber Jacobson
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-1600
amber.c.jacobson@nasa.gov
Share
Details
Last Updated Dec 16, 2024 LocationNASA Headquarters Related Terms
Pamela A. Melroy View the full article
-
-
Check out these Videos
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.