Apollo experiment S-217 IR/radar study of Apollo data

An experiment using Earth based remote sensing radar, infrared eclipse, and color difference data to deduce surface properties not visible in Apollo photography is reported. The Earth based data provided information on the small scale (centimeter sized) blockiness and on the surface chemical composition (titanium and iron contents) of the lunar surface. These deduced surface properties complemented the new Apollo photography, leading to refined geologic interpretations of the lunar surface

Estimating Lunar Pyroclastic Deposit Depth from Imaging Radar Data: Applications to Lunar Resource Assessment

Lunar pyroclastic deposits represent one of the primary anticipated sources of raw materials for future human settlements. These deposits are fine-grained volcanic debris layers produced by explosive volcanism contemporaneous with the early stage of mare infilling. There are several large regional pyroclastic units on the Moon (for example, the Aristarchus Plateau, Rima Bode, and Sulpicius Gallus formations), and numerous localized examples, which often occur as dark-halo deposits around endogenic craters (such as in the floor of Alphonsus Crater). Several regional pyroclastic deposits were studied with spectral reflectance techniques: the Aristarchus Plateau materials were found to be a relatively homogeneous blanket of iron-rich glasses. One such deposit was sampled at the Apollo 17 landing site, and was found to have ferrous oxide and titanium dioxide contents of 12 percent and 5 percent, respectively. While the areal extent of these deposits is relatively well defined from orbital photographs, their depths have been constrained only by a few studies of partially filled impact craters and by imaging radar data. A model for radar backscatter from mantled units applicable to both 70-cm and 12.6-cm wavelength radar data is presented. Depth estimates from such radar observations may be useful in planning future utilization of lunar pyroclastic deposits

Radio Astronomy

Contains reports on three research projects.National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Grant NsG-419

Electronic Instrumentation

Contains research objectives and reports on four research projects.National Institutes of Health (Grant 1 505 FR07047-01

Radio Astronomy

Contains reports on three research projects.National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Grant NsG-419)National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Contract NSR-22-009-120)Lincoln Laboratory Purchase Order No. 74

Financing Direct Democracy: Revisiting the Research on Campaign Spending and Citizen Initiatives

The conventional view in the direct democracy literature is that spending against a measure is more effective than spending in favor of a measure, but the empirical results underlying this conclusion have been questioned by recent research. We argue that the conventional finding is driven by the endogenous nature of campaign spending: initiative proponents spend more when their ballot measure is likely to fail. We address this endogeneity by using an instrumental variables approach to analyze a comprehensive dataset of ballot propositions in California from 1976 to 2004. We find that both support and opposition spending on citizen initiatives have strong, statistically significant, and countervailing effects. We confirm this finding by looking at time series data from early polling on a subset of these measures. Both analyses show that spending in favor of citizen initiatives substantially increases their chances of passage, just as opposition spending decreases this likelihood

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials [on behalf of the PAFS consensus group*]

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is a guideline designed to improve the transparency and quality of the reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In this article we present an extension to that statement for randomised pilot and feasibility trials conducted in advance of a future definitive RCT. The checklist applies to any randomised study in which a future definitive RCT, or part of it, is conducted on a smaller scale, regardless of its design (eg, cluster, factorial, crossover) or the terms used by authors to describe the study (eg, pilot, feasibility, trial, study). The extension does not directly apply to internal pilot studies built into the design of a main trial, non-randomised pilot and feasibility studies, or phase II studies, but these studies all have some similarities to randomised pilot and feasibility studies and so many of the principles might also apply. The development of the extension was motivated by the growing number of studies described as feasibility or pilot studies and by research that has identified weaknesses in their reporting and conduct. We followed recommended good practice to develop the extension, including carrying out a Delphi survey, holding a consensus meeting and research team meetings, and piloting the checklist. The aims and objectives of pilot and feasibility randomised studies differ from those of other randomised trials. Consequently, although much of the information to be reported in these trials is similar to those in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing effectiveness and efficacy, there are some key differences in the type of information and in the appropriate interpretation of standard CONSORT reporting items. We have retained some of the original CONSORT statement items, but most have been adapted, some removed, and new items added. The new items cover how participants were identified and consent obtained; if applicable, the prespecified criteria used to judge whether or how to proceed with a future definitive RCT; if relevant, other important unintended consequences; implications for progression from pilot to future definitive RCT, including any proposed amendments; and ethical approval or approval by a research review committee confirmed with a reference number. This article includes the 26 item checklist, a separate checklist for the abstract, a template for a CONSORT flowchart for these studies, and an explanation of the changes made and supporting examples. We believe that routine use of this proposed extension to the CONSORT statement will result in improvements in the reporting of pilot trials. Editor’s note: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the BMJ and Pilot and Feasibility Studies journal websites