跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2610.39689 · v1

AI for Science in Space: Orbital Laboratories, Planetary Fieldwork, and Embodied Autonomy

首次提交 2026-10-29 17:29
版本更新 2026-10-29 17:29
雷达观测 2026-10-30 13:28
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Artificial intelligence for science (AI4S) is extending from interpretation of existing data to the design and execution of experiments. Space offers distinctive scientific opportunities while restricting physical support. Microgravity and extraterrestrial environments expose phenomena that terrestrial experiments cannot fully reproduce; finite samples, constrained resources, and limited opportunities for intervention complicate sustained investigation. This critical review examines orbital laboratories and planetary in situ science across biology, materials, fluid and thermal physics, and adaptive exploration. We distinguish learning from space-derived data, selecting scientific actions, executing them, and preserving experimental validity. Terrestrial self-driving laboratories provide complementary evidence on optimization, dedicated automation, robotic manipulation, and the support needed for unattended operation. The synthesis connects scientific gains already demonstrated by bounded AI systems to gaps in observation, executable actions, and continuity of valid evidence. Space robots can expand the attainable scope of autonomous science when necessary interventions exceed validated instrument capabilities and timely human support is unavailable. Their value must be established against dedicated mechanisms, redundancy, and human-supported operation. We develop a framework connecting sample history, scientific decisions, physical execution, and claim-specific validity. A worked orbital design, a planetary extension, and matched evaluation schemes separate the contributions of sensing, decision policies, and physical actions. The resulting agenda measures autonomy through valid scientific return, task coverage, intervention costs, and evidence integrity across complete campaigns.

作者备注:47 pages, 5 figures, 7 tables. Ancillary evidence files included

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-10-29 17:29 · 最新观测版本

AI for Science in Space: Orbital Laboratories, Planetary Fieldwork, and Embodied Autonomy

Artificial intelligence for science (AI4S) is extending from interpretation of existing data to the design and execution of experiments. Space offers distinctive scientific opportunities while restricting physical support. Microgravity and extraterrestrial environments expose phenomena that terrestrial experiments cannot fully reproduce; finite samples, constrained resources, and limited opportunities for intervention complicate sustained investigation. This critical review examines orbital laboratories and planetary in situ science across biology, materials, fluid and thermal physics, and adaptive exploration. We distinguish learning from space-derived data, selecting scientific actions, executing them, and preserving experimental validity. Terrestrial self-driving laboratories provide complementary evidence on optimization, dedicated automation, robotic manipulation, and the support needed for unattended operation. The synthesis connects scientific gains already demonstrated by bounded AI systems to gaps in observation, executable actions, and continuity of valid evidence. Space robots can expand the attainable scope of autonomous science when necessary interventions exceed validated instrument capabilities and timely human support is unavailable. Their value must be established against dedicated mechanisms, redundancy, and human-supported operation. We develop a framework connecting sample history, scientific decisions, physical execution, and claim-specific validity. A worked orbital design, a planetary extension, and matched evaluation schemes separate the contributions of sensing, decision policies, and physical actions. The resulting agenda measures autonomy through valid scientific return, task coverage, intervention costs, and evidence integrity across complete campaigns.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗