Research
Original frameworks and the Collegium dissertation program
Three frameworks I developed on decision speed, encrypted data sharing, and lunar navigation, and a research program in which AI agents write dissertations on space and defend them before an examining board.
Original frameworks
-
Decision-Velocity Dividend
How faster decisions on board spacecraft shorten missions and save money
The economic value created when radiation-hardened computers running AI on board a spacecraft can make decisions in milliseconds instead of waiting for the ground. Shorter decision loops shorten commercial lunar and low Earth orbit mission timelines, which saves capital and lets a program start sooner.
-
COSMIC Framework
Sharing satellite conjunction data in encrypted form without exposing orbits
Cryptographic Operations for Space Monitoring and Information Circulation. It combines fully homomorphic encryption with post-quantum cryptography so that several operators can analyze close-approach data together without showing each other their proprietary orbit information.
-
Cislunar PNT Governance
Options for certifying navigation signals around the Moon
No one today certifies that a navigation signal around the Moon is accurate and safe to use, least of all when the satellite was built by someone else under a jurisdiction outside your agreements. This work sets out that gap and the options for closing it.
Collegium, a program where AI agents write and defend dissertations on space
Collegium is a research program I designed and chair. AI research agents each take one question about the space enterprise, build a sourced body of evidence, carry out a method, and write the result up as a dissertation. An examining board then tests it and looks for errors. Only work that passes the defense, and that I ratify, is counted.
How a dissertation is examined
-
01
Proposal
The agent states one testable contribution and names a real, obtainable dataset. A charter without real data is sent back.
-
02
Questioning from other viewpoints
A panel of perspectives drawn from very different schools of thought questions the charter before any research begins, so the evidence search is not just the agent restating its own claim.
-
03
Research
Literature review, method, and analysis, with the data, variable construction, and full model output kept in a form anyone can audit.
-
04
Defense
Six examiners: a chair, a methodologist, an empiricist, an archivist, a domain examiner, and an external examiner. The archivist checks citations against the full source text, and the external examiner tests whether the contribution is real. The archivist and the external examiner can each reject a dissertation on their own, and the chair cannot overrule them.
-
05
Ratification
I review every verdict before a dissertation is accepted. Verified citations join a shared ledger that later candidates draw on.
Each dissertation is a research edition written by an AI agent and examined by the board. None is submitted for a degree, and none is counted among my published papers.
Research portfolio by topic
876 research papers and monographs across six topic areas.
Ratified dissertations
First cohort, on NASA programs, deep space operations, and Earth science
| Title |
|---|
| Decision and Authorization Latency in NASA Programs: A Cliometric Analysis of Program Cost, Schedule, and Mission Cadence, 1958 to 2026 |
| Deep Space Network as a Queue: Contention, Wait-Time, and the Science-Throughput Penalty of Antenna Scheduling |
| Does Flight Heritage Buy Reliability? A Cross-Mission Regression of Realized On-Orbit Failure Rates Against Heritage and Parts-Class |
| The Economic Impact of Spacecraft Down-Mass and Orbital Reentry Operations on the U.S. National Airspace System |
| Cost-Overrun Hazards in Earth-Observing Missions: A Competing-Risks Model Separating Instrument-Driven from Launch-Driven Slip |
| Science Productivity of Earth-Observation Data Policy: A Difference-in-Differences Study of Open-Data Release on Mission Citation Yield |
| Retrieval-Accuracy Returns to Instrument Investment in Earth-Science Radiometers: A Hedonic Regression of Validated Science Accuracy on Cost Drivers |
| Learning Curves for Onboard Autonomy: Does Each Successive Autonomous-Operations Flight Demonstration Lower the Cost-to-Field of the Next? |
| Surface Mobility Productivity Across the Mars Rover Fleet: What Drives Drive-Distance and Sols-per-Meter? |
| Fault-Management Maturity and Mission-Anomaly Survival: A Hazard Model of Safe-Mode Entries and Recovery Outcomes |
| EDL Heritage and Landing-Success Hazard: Does Reuse of Flight-Proven Entry-Descent-Landing Architecture Reduce Landing-Failure Risk? |
| Landing-Ellipse Contraction as a Technology Learning Curve: Quantifying the Precision-Landing Improvement Rate Across Mars Missions |
Space cybersecurity and autonomy assurance
Spectrum and space licensing
| Title |
|---|
| Robust combinatorial coordination of cislunar C2 and communications |
| Transferable interference compatibility envelopes for changing space missions |
| Lunar communications and radio astronomy coexistence under cumulative emissions |
| Auditable technical review assistance for space licensing applications |
| Causal and process explanations of satellite licensing delay |
| Versioned machine-readable rules and traceable spectrum determinations |
| Resilient third-party relay services for spacecraft TT&C |
| Translating FCC and ITU requirements into reproducible cross-jurisdiction evidence |
| Fair and incentive-compatible access to shared space spectrum |
| Detecting emerging spectrum demand from filings and technical signals |
| Quantifying propagation of uncertainty from technical studies to spectrum decisions |
| Independent assurance of AI-accelerated spectrum engineering evidence |