# Presentation: 198585

## The Challenges of Using Mars Mission Datasets for Science Analysis

- Jeffrey R. Johnson
- United States Geological Survey
- Flagstaff, AZ
- jrjohnson@usgs.gov

**Searching, Finding, Reading, Understanding, and ****         ^**

##  Who are the customers (users) of mission data?

** ****Who are the customers (users) of mission data?**
-   Funded R&A PIs, Co-Is, Grad students, post-docs
-   Mission planners
-   Scientists interested in _*proposing to use*_ the data for R&A programs
-   **What are their goals?**
-  Detailed analyses
-   begin with raw data, calibrate it themselves, accurately correlate with surface features, other data sets, incorporate custom algorithms, etc.
-  Simple answers
-  does appropriate data exist for the region of interest?
-  what are standard characteristics of region of interest (altimetry, radiometry, composition...)

##  Mariner, Viking (lander, orbiter), Hubble

** ****Mariner, Viking (lander, orbiter), Hubble**
-   **Mars Pathfinder:  IMP, APXS, ASI/MET**
** ****Mars Global Surveyor:  MOC, TES, MOLA, MAG/ER**
** ****Mars Odyssey:  THEMIS, GRS, NS, MARIE, HEND**
** ****Mars Express:  HRSC, OMEGA, MARSIS/ASPERA/SPICAM**
** ****Mars Exploration Rovers:  Pancam, Mini-TES, MB, APXS, MI, RAT, Navcam, Hazcam**
** ****Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter:  HiRISE, CRISM, CTX, MARCI, MCS, SHARAD**
** *****Phoenix:  RAD, MARDI, SSI, TEGA, MECA, MET***
*** ******Mars Science Laboratory:  MastCam, MARDI, MAHLI, ChemCam, APXS, CheMin, SAM, DAN, RAD, REMS***

## Where’s the data?

**Get thee to a PDS website....**
**http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/**

## Or the Imaging Node....  http://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/

**Or the Imaging Node....  ****http://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/**

## Or the Geosciences Node....  http://pds-geosciences.wustl.edu/

##  The released data cannot be “used” easily by non-mission scientists:

** ****The released data cannot be “used” easily by non-mission scientists:**
-  Searches are stymied by data format challenges
-  Data are too “raw” to be useful....
-  data are organized/archived along mission timelines/orbits instead of spatial location
-  ...Or data are too highly processed (gridded, resampled) for users who wish to analyze “actual observations”
**  “****Quick look” overviews of available data for particular regions require substantial time commitments**
** **MOLA:  “There is not an easy way to find the right track, so a lot of time can be spent downloading a track that turns out to be not the one that is needed.”

## But there are *lots* of tools out there to locate and/or process data....

** ****MOC**
-  MS3: *http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ *
-  USGS:  *http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/*
* ***THEMIS**
-  ASU---THMPROC** ** *http://themis.asu.edu/*                  					      *http://themis.asu.edu/thmproc*
*  ***MER:  Analyst’s Notebook:  ***http://anserver1.eprsl.wustl.edu/*
*  ***Combined orbital data sets**
**  **USGS---PIGWAD:  *http://webgis.wr.usgs.gov*
*  *ASU---JMARS:*  http://jmars.asu.edu/*
-   Ames—MARSOWEB: *http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/*
-   USGS---ISIS (map projections), UPC: *http://isis.astrogeology.usgs.gov/*
*  *USGS---Map-a-Planet: *http://pdsmaps.wr.usgs.gov/maps.html*

##  The increasing complexity of Mars datasets results in custom software (s/w) development by instrument teams that is often the only means to visualize/analyze data 

** ****The increasing complexity of Mars datasets results in custom software (s/w) development by instrument teams that is often the only means to visualize/analyze data **
** **This s/w may be released at end of mission (but not always)
-  This s/w may be well documented/supported and available for a variety of platforms (but not always)
-  ISIS provides support for some (but not yet all) missions/data sets
-  Instrument/mission team s/w may require other proprietary tools to execute (e.g., IDL), but not always
-  Use of “virtual” IDL allows s/w use, but limited production ability (?)
-  Lack of this s/w results in redundant/complementary efforts to write tools necessary to visualize/analyze data

## What’s the problem?

** ****Argument Style 1**
** **Mars state-of-the-art instruments (remote sensing, in-situ) produce unique datasets that are complicated.  But there are lots of smart folks around who can deal with it.
-  Tools exist (or are in continuous development by missions and/or R&A folks) to search, quality-check, calibrate, spatially locate, and analyze many data sets.
-  If not, instrument documentation is always available to inform users how to work with the data.
-  Users need do their homework and learn how to work with complicated data sets.

## What’s the problem?

** ****Argument Style 2 (*****more productive*****)**
** **Complicated datasets have significant “learning curves” that limit effective and efficient use of the data to only the original instrument PI’s team and/or mission teams.
-  This inhibits widespread community involvement in understanding/interpreting datasets vital to our understanding of Mars and the future of the Mars Exploration Program.
-  These “roadblocks” cause some potential researchers to forego proposals to R&A, Participating Scientist programs
-  “I thought about writing a proposal, but it I didn’t have the time to become sufficiently fluent in all the datasets, so I bailed....”

## So what are the solutions? (1)

** ****Continue efforts toward synergizing data from multiple missions and making the data, s/w, derived products available in standardized, easily-accessible formats**
** **Expand/connect GIS-related servers
-  JMARS, PIGWAD, JPL, Google?
-  cf. Report of the Mars Environmental GIS Workshop, Oct. 5-6, 2005
-  Continue to advertise new tools via DPS/EGS/AGU/LPSC abstracts
-  Fund instrument teams to conduct workshops (on-line or in-person) for their instruments and datasets.  It’s _**E**_/PO!
-  TES, THEMIS have done this, others?
-  JMARS, ISIS already do this, too.

## So what’s the solution? (2)

** ****Encourage release of “lite” versions of mission-related software prior to end-of-mission**
** **Mainly for “quick-look” use, not necessarily detailed analysis
** **Curtail necessity of proprietary (expensive) s/w packages  IDLV?
** ****Missions need to have a cartographic planning component, and they should follow a consistent cartographic coordinate system and data format**
** ****Planetary image data should be systematically processed in a coordinated way and made available in an easily accessed form (e.g., a GIS).**
** ****But relatively small budgets permit only partial solutions – need to encourage ****increased funding****.**

## Report from Break-out Group #2:  IT Considerations Promote Dataset Synergy  (aka PDS)

- “GIS-ready” data that are easily used by researchers for display and analysis via Planetary Data Systems (PDS) or other
- Better defined processing steps for commonly used/requested data sets
- Easier tools/capabilities for processing raw data from each instrument into standard format(s)
- Provide validated/calibrated data in both raw and map projected formats
- Need improved data catalog / discovery capability whether the datasets reside at a centralized entity or individual research facility

- Report of the Mars Environmental GIS Workshop, Oct. 5-6, 2005
- _[http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/workshop/](http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/workshop/)__  (Dave Beaty)_

## Report from Break-out Group #2:  IT Considerations System Architecture

- PDS

- Other sources

- Standard
-  Interface

- Generic
- Processing
- Software
- (e.g., GIS)

- Standard
- Formats

- Need to identify / define / develop these components

- Report of the Mars Environmental GIS Workshop, Oct. 5-6, 2005

## Report from Break-out Group #2:  IT Considerations GIS Recommendations (cont)

- Provide “on-line services” to help process datasets that are not easily derived as a single final product (e.g., MOC narrow angle, THEMIS visible images).
- Work with future mission planners to “task” instruments and define processing steps to meet geodetic standards
- Develop outreach activities to educate the planetary community about the benefits of:
- GIS software* for spatial analyses
- Community-supported data formats

- Report of the Mars Environmental GIS Workshop, Oct. 5-6, 2005

-  *i.e., geospatial applications in general, preferably those that can share datasets
-   "*One application will simply not work for everyone*."  The goal is to standardize the formats and/or data distribution mechanisms to allow many applications to utilize the same data in different ways. ---*Trent Hare*