adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Subsurface Science and Search for Life in Ocean Worlds
Authors: Justin D. Lawrence, Andrew D. Mullen, Frances E. Bryson, Chase J. Chivers, Ashley M. Hanna, Taylor Plattner, Elizabeth M. Spiers, Jeff S. Bowman, Jacob J. Buffo, Justin L. Burnett, Christopher E. Carr, Daniel J. Dichek, Kynan H. G. Hughson, Walter King, E. Glenn Lightsey, Ellery Ingall, Jordan McKaig, Matthew R. Meister, Sara Pierson, Yashvardhan Tomar, Britney E. Schmidt
Figure caption: Conceptual diagram of the SSSLOW payload. Phase 1, External Facing Instruments: A context imager and DUV spectrometer collect high-frequency observations of the borehole sidewall. Fluid sampling can be triggered if features of interest are detected, such as organics or pigmented inclusions. Phase 2, Bulk Physical Characterization of Fluid: Liquid from the melt pocket is drawn into the vehicle through one of multiple inlet ports. A low-power flow-through oceanographic package enables near continuous measurement of temperature, conductivity, pressure, and density. Sample aliquots can be passed to an electrochemistry cell for measurements of pH, redox potential, and ionic strength. Measurements here are used to investigate the surrounding environment, assess habitability, and inform downstream processing and analysis prioritization. Phase 3, Optical Measurements of Fluid: With optional preconcentration, sample aliquots enter an optical flow cell, where they are analyzed by a microscope for life detection and Raman spectrometer. These instruments provide correlated morphologic and chemical observations of minimally processed samples. Phase 4, Precision Chemical Measurements of Fluid: Discrete fluid sample packets are mechanically depressurized before entering a sealed scientific housing and can be desalted if needed. The sample is then divided for analysis by separation MS and nanopore sequencing. These precision chemical measurements detect nucleic acids and proteins and characterize amino acids, gases, ions, and other organic compounds of interest.
Paper: Astrobiology eXploration at Enceladus (AXE): A New Frontiers Mission Concept Study
Authors: K. Marshall Seaton, Szilárd Gyalay, Gaia Stucky de Quay, Ethan R. Burnett, C. Adeene Denton, Bryce Doerr, Kamak Ebadi, Stephanie Eckert, Ian. T. W. Flynn, Casey I. Honniball, Shayna Hume, Corbin L. Kling, Julian C. Marohnic, Julia Milton, Claire A. Mondro, Raquel G. Nuno, Caoimhe M. Rooney, Beck E. Strauss, Alfred Nash, Jennifer E. C. Scully
Figure caption: Schematic overview of AXE’s investigation sites and associated science objectives at Enceladus. (a) Enceladus’ interior depicting heat sourced from the rocky core and multiple water jets forming the plume; see (b) for more detail. (b) Key features of the Enceladus core-ocean-ice shell boundaries, including heat source, ice shell, and water ice jets. (c) Area of interest containing all four sites of investigation under AXE: ice/water jets (green), ice shell (blue), vents/fissures (yellow), and surface (gray) (shown, respectively, with CASSINI images in (d)–(g) but lacking the resolution required for AXE science objectives). Each site would address a separate science objective (1–4, see Section 1): (d) plume composition (green arrows) used to examine biological potential (objective 1); (e) ice shell thickness measurements (blue arrows) to determine energy balance (objective 2); (f) vent width variations (yellow arrows) used to determine plume sourcing mechanism; and (g) surface crater mapping (gray circles) to determine plume and ice shell history. Underlying images in (d), (e), (f), and (g) were retrieved from NASA/JPL-Caltech.
Paper: Astrobiology eXploration at Enceladus (AXE): A New Frontiers Mission Concept Study
Authors: K. Marshall Seaton, Szilárd Gyalay, Gaia Stucky de Quay, Ethan R. Burnett, C. Adeene Denton, Bryce Doerr, Kamak Ebadi, Stephanie Eckert, Ian. T. W. Flynn, Casey I. Honniball, Shayna Hume, Corbin L. Kling, Julian C. Marohnic, Julia Milton, Claire A. Mondro, Raquel G. Nuno, Caoimhe M. Rooney, Beck E. Strauss, Alfred Nash, Jennifer E. C. Scully
Figure caption: An abbreviated version of the AXE science traceability matrix. From left to right: science objectives drive scientific measurement requirements, which then drive instrument performance requirements and mission requirements necessary to achieve science closure for each science objective. Each AXE science objective addresses multiple 2013–2022 decadal survey (DS) goals (left panel). Instruments are referred to by their acronyms: BEENIE, Better Eyes on ENceladus IcE; MAIAB, Molecular And Isotopic Analysis for Biomarkers.
Paper: Astrobiology eXploration at Enceladus (AXE): A New Frontiers Mission Concept Study
Authors: K. Marshall Seaton, Szilárd Gyalay, Gaia Stucky de Quay, Ethan R. Burnett, C. Adeene Denton, Bryce Doerr, Kamak Ebadi, Stephanie Eckert, Ian. T. W. Flynn, Casey I. Honniball, Shayna Hume, Corbin L. Kling, Julian C. Marohnic, Julia Milton, Claire A. Mondro, Raquel G. Nuno, Caoimhe M. Rooney, Beck E. Strauss, Alfred Nash, Jennifer E. C. Scully
Figure caption: Expected molecular abundances as a function of molecular mass for (a) abiotic systems, (b) biotic systems, and (c) the selective enrichment or depletion of molecules expected in biological samples.
Paper: On Ganymede’s Magnetic Quadrupolar Strength
Authors: A. M. Plattner, C. L. Johnson, M. J. Styczinski, S. D. Vance, A. C. Mills
Figure caption: Raw data of the flybys of Galileo and Juno, including data before and after the encounter with Ganymede’s magnetosphere in IAU coordinates. Dashed lines show Jupiter’s background field (Table 1). Dotted vertical lines show estimated transitions into and out of Ganymede’s magnetosphere, based on visually determined abrupt changes in the magnetic field measurements. The data time ranges used in our calculations for Ganymede’s internal field are indicated by white bands and were taken from Kivelson et al. (2002) and Weber et al. (2022). Each panel has its own y-axis range, in nT for the magnetic data and km for the altitude data. Ranges are indicated in the top-left and bottom-left of each panel. Altitudes are above Ganymede’s mean radius of r  G  = 2631.2 km; the bottom of each altitude panel is 0, and the closest approach altitude of each flyby is labeled.
Paper: On Ganymede’s Magnetic Quadrupolar Strength
Authors: A. M. Plattner, C. L. Johnson, M. J. Styczinski, S. D. Vance, A. C. Mills
Figure caption: Correlation matrix for the spherical harmonic coefficients up to ﹩{L}_{\max }=2﹩ for the available flyby data (Figure 2, Table 1). For well-resolved coefficients, all cells off the diagonal must be close to zero (white). Red and blue cells off the diagonal indicate strong correlations and anticorrelations that prevent resolution of the intrinsic moments for Ganymede from existing flyby data.
Paper: On Ganymede’s Magnetic Quadrupolar Strength
Authors: A. M. Plattner, C. L. Johnson, M. J. Styczinski, S. D. Vance, A. C. Mills
Figure caption: Spacecraft tracks for Galileo (G1–G29) and Juno (J34) for the time ranges in Table 1. A Mollweide projection is used for Ganymede’s IAU coordinate system. The map is centered on Ganymede’s sub-Jovian point, with Ganymede’s leading hemisphere on the left.
Paper: On Ganymede’s Magnetic Quadrupolar Strength
Authors: A. M. Plattner, C. L. Johnson, M. J. Styczinski, S. D. Vance, A. C. Mills
Figure caption: Radial component of the internal magnetic field models  B  int from Table 3 (no ocean induction) plotted on Ganymede’s surface (r  G  = 2631.2 km), together with the corresponding data locations that were used in the internal field calculations. Black dashed lines indicate magnetic equators. (a) L1–, (b) L2A–, (c) L2B–, (d) L2C–, (e) L2D–, (f) L2E–.
Paper: On Ganymede’s Magnetic Quadrupolar Strength
Authors: A. M. Plattner, C. L. Johnson, M. J. Styczinski, S. D. Vance, A. C. Mills
Figure caption: Data after subtraction of  B   J  (gray solid lines) and modeled data  B  int+ B   U  (black dashed lines) from models (a) L2A– and (b) L2B–, shown for flybys G1, G2, G28, and J34.