#3582 NASA Program Entity Properties

-

#3582 NASA Program Entity Properties

#3582 For all the elements of NASA Artemis, Gateway and Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility programs, what are common entity properties that could be defined in a knowledge graph?

For NASA’s Artemis, Gateway, and Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) programs, building a knowledge graph requires identifying shared entity types and their common properties that enable cross-domain integration, traceability, and analysis.

Here’s a structured breakdown of common entity properties that should be included across all three programs in a Knowledge Graph (KG):

✅ 1. Identity & Classification

  • entity_id: Unique identifier (UUID, URI, etc.)

  • name: Common name of the element/system

  • program: [Artemis | Gateway | EHP]

  • element_type: [Module | Vehicle | Tool | Mission | Component | Subsystem]

  • status: [Planned | In Development | Operational | Retired]

  • version: Design or hardware/software version

✅ 2. Functional Role & Capabilities

  • functional_purpose: Description of its role in mission context

  • capabilities: List of key capabilities (e.g., EVA support, propulsion, habitation)

  • use_cases: Linked operational scenarios or missions

  • dependencies: Other entities required to function

✅ 3. Physical & Performance Parameters

  • mass: Mass (kg)

  • dimensions: Dimensions (LxWxH)

  • power_requirements: Typical power consumption / generation (Watts)

  • operational_range: Duration, range, altitude, etc.

  • environmental_tolerance: Temperature, radiation, pressure tolerances

✅ 4. Interfaces & Interoperability

  • interface_standards: Compliance to NASA standards or custom interfaces

  • communication_protocols: e.g., TCP/IP, CCSDS

  • mechanical_interfaces: Physical docking or mounting systems

  • data_interfaces: APIs or data bus formats

✅ 5. Lifecycle Metadata

  • development_phase: [Concept | Design | Integration | Testing | Deployed]

  • start_date: Project start or PDR date

  • delivery_date: Estimated or actual delivery date

  • flight_readiness: [Planned | Simulated | Certified]

✅ 6. Location & Geometry

  • location: Current or expected physical location (e.g., orbit, lunar surface)

  • geo_reference: Spatial coordinates (if applicable)

  • volume_footprint: Occupied volume (m³)

✅ 7. Stakeholders & Responsibility

  • owner: NASA organization or contractor responsible

  • developer: Responsible development team or company

  • mission_leads: Human leads or contacts

  • funding_source: Budget account or funding organization

✅ 8. Risks, Hazards & Assurance

  • known_risks: Identified risks (technical, schedule, budget)

  • safety_classification: [Human-rated | Uncrewed | Critical | Non-critical]

  • mitigations: Links to hazard control strategies

  • assurance_documents: SA/QA evidence (linked docs or IDs)

✅ 9. Relationships & Dependencies

  • parent_entity: Higher-level system or element

  • child_entities: Subsystems or attached elements

  • operational_dependencies: What this entity relies on to function

  • supporting_entities: e.g., power system, communication relay

✅ 10. Data & Documentation

  • linked_documents: Interface Control Docs, Requirements, Specs

  • telemetry_channels: Relevant telemetry and command points

  • data_products: Output formats or science data it produces

  • simulation_models: Digital twin, CAD, Simulink models, etc.

✅ 11. Schedule & Milestones

  • milestones: List of key dates and events (e.g., PDR, CDR, Launch)

  • schedule_status: [On track | At risk | Delayed]

  • integration_window: Timeframe for integration or deployment

✅ 12. Budget & Cost

  • estimated_cost: Total program cost estimate

  • actual_cost: Tracked expenditures

  • budget_variance: Cost over/under baseline

✅ 13. Logistics & Sustainment

  • logistics_chain: How the element is transported/deployed

  • resupply_needs: Frequency/type of resupply (if any)

  • maintenance_schedule: Required inspections or servicing

✅ 14. Science & Mission Contribution

  • science_objectives: Specific science goals supported

  • payloads_supported: Instruments or experiments enabled

  • mission_contribution: How it supports overall Artemis objectives

✅ 15. Provenance & Traceability

  • source_system: Where the data or metadata came from

  • last_updated: Timestamp of last metadata update

  • data_quality: Confidence or verification status

🧠 Use in the Knowledge Graph

In a Neo4j or RDF-based KG:

  • Each entity (e.g., Gateway Power and Propulsion Element, xEMU suit, Orion capsule) is a node.

  • These properties are key:value pairs on each node.

  • Relationships (:DEPENDS_ON, :PART_OF, :SUPPORTS, :INTERFACES_WITH) are first-class citizens, enabling traceability and impact analysis.

Would you like me to provide a Neo4j node template or RDF/OWL shape for one of these programs or categories?


What are a common set of relationships between entities that would be useful in a knowledge graph?

A common set of relationships between entities in a knowledge graph for NASA’s Artemis, Gateway, and EHP programs should support traceability, dependency analysis, system-of-systems engineering, and operational planning. These relationships form the semantic backbone of the knowledge graph.

✅ Core Relationship Types for NASA Knowledge Graph

Below is a curated list of useful relationship types, grouped by function, with suggested naming conventions (Neo4j-style :RELATIONSHIP_NAME):

🔁 Structural and Hierarchical Relationships

These express system/component breakdowns and physical part-whole relations.

  • :PART_OF — This entity is a physical or logical part of another

  • :HAS_SUBSYSTEM — Higher-level system contains this subsystem

  • :HOSTED_ON — Component or payload is installed or hosted on a platform

  • :INTERFACES_WITH — Entities that connect via mechanical, electrical, or software interfaces

  • :CONTAINS — For container-like relationships (e.g., habitat contains EVA suits)

⚙️ Functional and Operational Relationships

These relate to mission roles, responsibilities, and capabilities.

  • :PROVIDES_CAPABILITY — Entity supports or enables a functional capability

  • :SUPPORTS_OPERATION — System or element supports a specific operation or mission phase

  • :DEPENDS_ON — This system/function relies on another to operate (e.g., suit depends on oxygen tank)

  • :ENABLED_BY — Functional capability enabled by a specific resource or system

🔌 Interface and Data Relationships

These represent flow of information, power, or other interfaces.

  • :CONNECTED_TO — Physically or logically connected

  • :EXCHANGES_DATA_WITH — Bi-directional data flow

  • :SENDS_TELEMETRY_TO — Designated receiver of telemetry data

  • :RECEIVES_COMMANDS_FROM — Controller or commanding authority

  • :SHARES_INTERFACE_STANDARD — Common interface standard (e.g., power plug type, protocol)

🧭 Temporal and Event Relationships

Capture scheduling, lifecycle, and sequencing.

  • :PRECEDES — One event/system milestone happens before another

  • :SCHEDULED_FOR — Entity is scheduled for a mission, activity, or phase

  • :PHASE_OF — Entity is part of a defined lifecycle or mission phase

  • :RETIRED_BY — System is phased out or replaced by another

👥 Organizational and Responsibility Relationships

Link entities to organizations, roles, and accountability.

  • :OWNED_BY — Organizational owner (e.g., NASA center or contractor)

  • :DEVELOPED_BY — Developer or manufacturer of the element

  • :OPERATED_BY — Responsible operator (e.g., crew, ground station)

  • :FUNDED_BY — Budget source or financial sponsor

📜 Documentation and Reference Relationships

Connect elements to documents, models, and requirements.

  • :DOCUMENTED_BY — Linked documentation (e.g., ICD, spec, drawing)

  • :DERIVED_FROM — Output based on another entity (e.g., simulation derived from real data)

  • :CONSTRAINED_BY — Constrained by a policy, requirement, or regulation

  • :VALIDATED_BY — Test case or analysis that validates the entity

🧪 Risk, Safety, and Assurance Relationships

Allow cross-cutting analyses for mission-critical operations.

  • :ASSOCIATED_WITH_RISK — Risk is linked to this entity

  • :MITIGATES — Control system or process mitigates a hazard

  • :REQUIRES_VERIFICATION — Must be verified before operational use

  • :AUDITED_BY — Entity reviewed or evaluated by assurance or QA

🛰️ Mission and Asset Deployment Relationships

Capture dynamics of hardware during missions.

  • :DEPLOYED_TO — Destination (e.g., Moon, LLO, Gateway)

  • :TRANSPORTED_BY — Vehicle responsible for delivery

  • :USED_DURING — Mission, EVA, or activity using the entity

  • :RECOVERED_BY — Retrieved post-mission

🔄 Examples of Relationship Chains

  1. xEMU :HOSTED_ON Gateway Airlock :PART_OF Gateway

  2. LTV :DEPLOYED_TO Moon Surface :SUPPORTS_OPERATION Surface Traverse

  3. Orion :CONNECTED_TO Artemis II :OPERATED_BY NASA Crew

  4. EVA Suit :DEPENDS_ON Oxygen Tank :MITIGATES Vacuum Hazard

Would You Like:

  • A Neo4j-style relationship matrix for a sample system?

  • A knowledge graph schema diagram for Artemis or Gateway?

  • A set of Cypher statements to instantiate these relationships?

Let me know, and I’ll generate it.


From <https://chatgpt.com/>  ChatGPT 4o

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

#2892 Example of ChatGPT o1 Prompt

-
#2892 Example of ChatGPT o1 Prompt #2892 Consider this prompt example from a tutorial:  """The Anatomy of an o1 Prompt Goal: I want a list of the best medium-length hikes within two hours of San Francisco. Each hike should provide an unique adventure, and be lesser know. Return Format: For each hike, return the name of the hike as I'd find it on AllTrails, then provide the starting address of the hike, the ending address of the hike, distance, drive time, hike duration, and what makes it a cool and unique adventure. Warnings: Be careful to make sure the name of the trail is correct, that it actually exists, and that the time is correct! Context Dump: For context: my girlfriend and I hike a ton! We've don pretty much all of the local SF hikes, whether that's Presidio or Golden Gate Park. we definitely want to get out of town -- we did mount tam pretty recently, the whole thing from the beginning of the stairs to Stinson -- it was really long and we are def...
Read more
-
#65 Compose a song about mankind traveling to the stars to find life, riches and happiness Verse 1 : We set out on a journey to the stars Searching for a new world, free from scars A place where we can find our destiny And build a life that's meant to be Chorus : We are the explorers, the brave and true On a mission to find what's waiting for us In the vast expanse of the universe We'll go where no man has gone before Verse 2 : We'll cross the galaxy, we'll go far and wide To find a home where we can thrive We'll brave the dangers that come our way And find the riches that lay hidden in the stars Chorus : We are the explorers, the brave and true On a mission to find what's waiting for us In the vast expanse of the universe We'll go where no man has gone before Bridge : We'll meet new friends and see new sights And learn about the mysteries of the night We'll find new worlds and new life And see what the future holds in our sights Chorus : We are ...
Read more

#3105 Federal and State Spending Idiocy

-
#3105 Federal and State Spending Idiocy A historic highway overpass for animals cost nearly $100 million and is almost done https://www.yahoo.com/news/historic-highway-overpass-animals-cost-100115264.html #3105 Considering that a state is building a 100-foot wide grass covered overpass across 6 lanes of interstate and shoulders, describe all budget items and the total budget for this task. Reasoned about overpass construction budgeting for a few seconds I'm mapping out a budget for a 100-foot wide grass-covered overpass. Categories include design, permitting, site preparation, structural construction, landscaping, signage, safety features, environmental mitigation, traffic management, and contingency, totaling an approximate $20-30 million. Below is a sample, high-level breakdown of typical budget items for constructing a 100-foot-wide, grass-covered overpass across six interstate lanes (plus shoulders). Actual costs vary significantly depending on location, terrain, materials, lab...
Read more