2024-06-13 Working Meeting

Meetings are public and interested parties are encouraged to attend. Meetings occur on the second Thursday of every month at the time indicated below.

Teams Link

Number: 1-833-436-1163 Meeting Code: 864 509 369#

• Mark McClernan
• Brent Archinal
• Jay Laura
• Laz Kestay
• Todd Joslin
• Marc Hunter

• LSSW Updates:

  • Lunar SDI: We presented. Did not generate questions. Also discussed international lunar year.

• Lunar Resources (Laz):

  • Folks were excited about data fusion. Laz provided information about what is needed to perform data fusion (i.e., standards).
  • Got feedback about 3d (subsurface data). USGS has folks that are working on standards about that. We should discuss when ready.
  • International space resources prospecting campaign. They (Clive Neil) have decided that they can not hope that all space agencies will come into some grand alignment. We can encourage everyone to talk to one another. From their perspective, data and interoperability are the key to making progress.

• PA/ME?

  • No information at this time.
  • This is a NASA only decision that then goes to other government agencies.

• Others

  • Lunar geoid.

• Data Producer Outreach:

  • Get Mark added.
  • Context
  • What do we do with the checklists?
    • If they pass, we list them.
    • If they do not pass, we go and connect with the producers and start to determine what can be done. We make a sharepoint site.
    • Make a distinction: do the data meet the standards? do the metadata meet the standards? does the license meet the standard?
      • Either way, we should talk to the data producer first.
      • We can then determine how to provide, how to help, etc.
  • Review spreadsheet
    • Technical savvy is needed to be able to
    • Polar LOLA DEMs (PDS) archive
      • It sounded like one data sets, but this is many different data sets at different resolutions, in different coordinate systems. Most have the same characteristics.
        • Do we need to capture anything?
      • They document JPL 421. They have a product that is in PA as well for PA folks.
        • Should this be an either or in the checklist?
      • They declared the datums and reference frames.
      • Projection - how to check
        • We need to provide a how to.
      • Formats: None are cloud optimized, no metadata, not discoverable. This is PDS stuff, so no expectation (see below for notes on communicating this well.)
      • Metadata:
        • Not STAC/ISO: How can a reviewer know this?
      • Homepage:
        • Data has a homepage.
      • Accuracy:
        • Producers discuss the accuracies, but not alongside the data. So, access can be problematic. Not machine-readable.
        • They do not talk about fitness of use.
        • Go read the paper.
      • Provenance is not provided.
      • Interpolation:
        • It is interpolated and well documented.
      • Licensing:
        • As a reviewer, not sure how to interpret. (See discussion below.)
        • It is clearly public.
    • SLDEM 2015:
      • Grabbed the TIF from USGS Annex
      • Used gdalinfo to pull answers to a lot of this.
      • Does not support all of the online metadata.
      • Formats:
        • BigTiff and/or IMG/JP2.
        • Online data access, likely legacy issues about serving really large data sets. Something for us to address.
      • Metadata
        • No STAC, no ISO, USGS has FGDC and MIT has PDS3 labels.
        • Very robust metadata (!!!)
        • Falls short of providing fitness of use metadata
        • No provenance, the workflow is not reproducible.
      • Licensing, no license other than ‘public domain’.
        • Document here.
    • Updates:
      • License:
        • Add some text to explain what to look for. What language is important?
        • Where are we expecting to see this information? Where does the PDS store the license information?
      • Are there levels of importance? Not everything is universally important.
        • Categorical: data, interoperability, streaming/cloud? Maybe take a WAG at making categories?
        • Highlight where things are a new standard.
        • Add language that the data pre-date the standards. The goal is to have data in compliance.
      • Do we look at the data that are in the PDS?
        • Discussion. Yes / No.
        • The PDS is a source of data that we need to be able to access.
        • There needs to be a means to take data from the PDS.
        • We need a generic answer to the generic problem. There needs to be a good way to generically make the PDS data usable/FAIR/interopable, etc.
          • Nominally, this is a problem that the PDE exists to address.
          • Write some text: what is the purpose of the data storage location. Is it intended to be an archive? If so, it is not designed to meet the standards as we are drafting them.
      • Provide examples (via links) to using gdalinfo / ogrinfo for getting metadata. What information should one expect to see embedded in the data themselves?
      • AI/ML
        • If they were derived in whole or in part. Did they use ENVI for statistical learning? Yes, one wants to know that.
        • Are the algorithms provided for the derivation? If yes, then this is not generated using statistical learning and/or AI/ML.
        • Is this made using generative AI?
        • If you used AI/ML was it called out.

• NGA geoid - as it informs ocentric vs. ographic discussion (if needed)

• Action Items

July 11 @ 2PM MST.