Life support systems analysis and technical trades for a lunar outpost

The NASA/JPL life support systems analysis (LISSA) software tool was used to perform life support system analysis and technology trades for a Lunar Outpost. The life support system was modeled using a chemical process simulation program on a steady-state, one-person, daily basis. Inputs to the LiSSA model include metabolic balance load data, hygiene load data, technology selection, process operational assumptions and mission parameter assumptions. A baseline set of technologies has been used against which comparisons have been made by running twenty-two cases with technology substitutions. System, subsystem, and technology weights and powers are compared for a crew of 4 and missions of 90 and 600 days. By assigning a weight value to power, equivalent system weights are compared. Several less-developed technologies show potential advantages over the baseline. Solid waste treatment technologies show weight and power disadvantages but one could have benefits associated with the reduction of hazardous wastes and very long missions. Technology development towards reducing the weight of resupplies and lighter materials of construction was recommended. It was also recommended that as technologies are funded for development, contractors should be required to generate and report data useful for quantitative technology comparisons

Leading-effect vs. Risk-taking in Dynamic Tournaments: Evidence from a Real-life Randomized Experiment

Two 'order effects' may emerge in dynamic tournaments with information feedback. First, participants adjust effort across stages, which could advantage the leading participant who faces a larger 'effective prize' after an initial victory (leading-effect). Second, participants lagging behind may increase risk at the final stage as they have 'nothing to lose' (risk-taking). We use a randomized natural experiment in professional two-game soccer tournaments where the treatment (order of a stage-specific advantage) and team characteristics, e.g. ability, are independent. We develop an identification strategy to test for leading-effects controlling for risk-taking. We find no evidence of leading-effects and negligible risk-taking effects

Best-of-Three Contests: Experimental Evidence

We conduct an experimental analysis of a best-of-three Tullock contest. Intermediate prizes lead to higher efforts, while increasing the role of luck (as opposed to effort) leads to lower efforts. Both intermediate prizes and luck reduce the probability of contest ending in two rounds. The patterns of players‟ efforts and the probability that a contest ends in two rounds is consistent with „strategic momentum‟, i.e. momentum generated due to strategic incentives inherent in the contest. We do not find evidence for „psychological momentum‟, i.e. momentum which emerges when winning affects players‟ confidence. Similar to previous studies of contests, we find significantly higher efforts than predicted and strong heterogeneity in effort between subjects

A Survey of Experimental Research on Contests, All-Pay Auctions and Tournaments

Many economic, political and social environments can be described as contests in which agents exert costly efforts while competing over the distribution of a scarce resource. These environments have been studied using Tullock contests, all-pay auctions and rankorder tournaments. This survey provides a review of experimental research on these three canonical contests. First, we review studies investigating the basic structure of contests, including the contest success function, number of players and prizes, spillovers and externalities, heterogeneity, and incomplete information. Second, we discuss dynamic contests and multi-battle contests. Then we review research on sabotage, feedback, bias, collusion, alliances, and contests between groups, as well as real-effort and field experiments. Finally, we discuss applications of contests to the study of legal systems, political competition, war, conflict avoidance, sales, and charities, and suggest directions for future research. (author's abstract