Log

Newest first. One entry per session: ## Session N — YYYY-MM-DD — <queue item>.

Session 62 — 2026-10-01 — Rewrite the index as a finished page for readers

Read: schema, the index in full, the last log entry, queue; open question 80 and the "A marking in the text layer" section of Ignition deck 1's source page; the list of pages on disk (by folder).

Updated:

• index.md, rewritten in one pass:
  • an opening paragraph on how the wiki is organized (ADD Rev C as the architecture of record, older documents and slides as context, joins labeled), then pointers: Overview, Sources (sources/index.md), About (about.md), "How the pages are written" (SCHEMA.md), "Open questions", "Build log". queue.md is not linked; no personal names
  • a "Start here" table (Overview, Needs); the Moon Base, architecture, objectives, tenets, segments, sub-architectures and elements tables; the ADD's appendices mapped to the pages that hold them
  • every summary cut down from the old row to one line of what the page holds; "(session N)", "Since session …", "now" and "added in …" phrasing removed. Architecture change ("since Rev C", "older than Rev C") kept as content. No fact added that the old row didn't have
  • the gap and data-gap tables copied through (they had no session tags); the gaps index and data gaps index rows shortened
  • the sources split into seven groups: the current architecture; earlier products (2022–2024); the Users Guide and Ignition; the workshops (2026, February 2025 with copies listed together, February 2024); Moon Base web pages and releases (hub and reference pages first, then dated items by month, July 2025 to September 2026); NASA's architecture web pages; linked pages. Deck 1's row says the CUI line is in the text layer, not on the slides, and that the wiki cites the deck like any public source
• Ignition deck 1's source page, "A marking in the text layer": "and asks the project lead whether that is right" removed; the sentence now ends at "like any other public source", with the link to question 80 kept
• Open question 80: marked "Decided by the project lead, 2026-10-01: cite as public"; its later notes left as they were

Dates: the queue item gave the question-80 marker as 2026-10-02; corrected after the session to 2026-10-01, the day of the decision (Pacific time). This entry and the updated: lines use the session date, 2026-10-01.

One unresolved link on purpose: about.md, the About page, is being written outside the queue. Until it exists, the index's link to it is the only link in the wiki that doesn't resolve. (After the session: the About page was already on disk, written while the session ran, and the link check found 0 broken links.)

For the next session: the queue has no unchecked item. Still open from the project's list: rerun tools/wiki/fix_lists.py, regenerate wiki/sources/index.md, open question 100 (SCHEMA named on about 40 source pages), and the About page. Checks on the new index: see below.

Checked after the entry above:

• links to sources/: 152 distinct targets (157 links, five pages linked twice), the same as the 152 files in wiki/sources/ counted with a ^title: search (151 source pages and the generated sources/index.md). The odd file names (parterships, peformance, ip-gista, m2m_strategy_and_objectives_development, the capitalized ntrs-…-ACR25-WP-… names, and the truncated …mission-.md, …demonstr.md, …technolog.md, …admi.md, …-pro.md, …lunar-te.md, …moon-base-m.md) match the files on disk
• topic pages: all 10 Moon Base, 22 concept, 7 objective, 5 segment, 13 sub-architecture and 16 element pages linked; 86 links into gaps/ and data-gaps/ (both indexes twice, 57 gaps, 25 data gaps)
• the index has no personal name and no "queue"; "session" occurs only in workshop session titles and file names ("breakout-session")
• no content page outside log.md, queue.md, open-questions.md and SCHEMA.md names the project lead. Three source pages (Ignition deck 2, deck 1, the January 2026 workshop deck) link question 80 without calling it open; left as they are

Corrected after a review of the new prose: the February 2025 group's note said every deck was shown at both workshops (Paths to Partnership, International Partnerships and the EDL briefing were shown at one); the Moon Base web pages table was not in date order as first written (now reordered, its heading "2025–2026" for the July 2025 CLPS graphic); the fission row said "the lunar night" where the old row said "lunar winter" (restored); the opening paragraph now names the whole current set from SCHEMA (Rev C, the two gap spreadsheets, the Update, the Users Guide), says newer material sits beside Rev C, and says "on the content pages" (partner posters are attributed to their agencies). The Gateway, HLS, Environment, Elements index, Foundational Exploration and Moon Base Solicitations rows were read against their old rows: no drift.

Session 61 — 2026-10-01 — Final pass on the overview, needs and index for the new Moon Base sources

Read: schema, index (first part), the last three log entries and session 57's, queue; overview.md and moon-base/needs.md in full; Users Guide p. 6; the topic sections that hold the session 57–58 sources (Architecture definition process's realignment section, Phases' Moon Base Systems table, the Moon Base hub's program lines, Surface technology's LEIA and NextSTEP-3 B lines, Mars-forward's and the fission page's SR-1 lines, Missions and assets' "Other context"); the Moon Base Systems source page; the data gaps index's Phase 1 missions table; the gaps index's Rev B against Rev C list; open questions 95–99; the podcast's lines on the architecture team and the reactors, from the source file.

Updated:

• Overview:
  • top six: #1107 from 11th (bin 2) in Rev B to 4th (bin 1) in Rev C, labeled the wiki's comparison of the February 2025 briefing's slide 5 with the spreadsheet
  • Moon Base: a "Flight tests in Phase 1" bullet quoting the guide's p. 6 (one of its two "key strategic factors"); a bullet on four Phase 1 missions (SCALPSS, LDES, VIPER, MoonFall) and the data gaps on the same subjects, from the data gaps index; Moon Base Systems beside deck 2; links to Phase 1 functional gaps, Technology and knowledge challenges and Lunar site selection
  • "What has changed since Rev C": the May 2026 realignment (HSMD, RTMD, Artemis "renamed from Moon to Mars", the Moon Base Program and Directive 6's plan, the program manager's "matching up to technology gaps", as reported, and the silence on the ADD); the LR-1 bullet now "Nuclear power: SR-1, then Lunar Reactor-1", with Directive 7's "LR-1 ready for launch by 2030", SR-1's mission page and the podcast's "end of phase two" (no reactor named, so "no source puts either in a Moon Base phase" stands); a new "New solicitations since Ignition" bullet (LEIA and NextSTEP-3 B); the closing line on the next ADD revision
  • the disagreements table: rows 97 (pressurized rover, 28 or 30 days) and 98 (Moon Base II and III in 2026 or later). The lead-in's "in most of them the two documents share a date or one is undated" still holds
  • CLPS, SCaN, HSMD, RTMD, LEIA, TRL, LR-1, SCALPSS, LDES and VIPER spelled out at first use, each from a source (SCALPSS, LDES and VIPER from the Moon Base Phases page; NextSTEP-3 from the LEIA draft-input article)
  • nine sources added to the frontmatter and the Sources list; Users Guide p. 6 added
• Needs, by phase: Moon Base Systems by phase (Phase One beside the guide's targets, labeled; Phase Two; Phase Three); the pressurized rover's "up to 28 days" now cited to the phases page and Rev C p. 63, with the Systems page's "up to 30 days" and question 97 (also in the open points); LR-1's bullet with Directive 7, SR-1's page and the podcast; the technology-program bullet names LEIA; a new "Moon Base architecture gaps" bullet (NextSTEP-3 B, the program's plan); the summary mentions both; seven sources added to the frontmatter and Sources
• index.md: the Overview and Needs rows

Not done as asked: the queue says the four Phase 1 missions "already measure data gaps". They are planned missions, and the data gaps index says the matching is the wiki's (the one source-made link is DN-017 L's row naming SCALPSS for its earlier Blue Ghost flight). The overview says what they "will" measure and labels the matching. The June release's "open solicitation for Moon Base technology demonstrations" is not matched to NextSTEP-3 B: no page makes that match, and no source does.

Finished-page check (after the entry above):

• session 56's session-number searches (^[^u].*[Ss]essions? \d|^u[^p]…|^up[^d]…, its blind-spot fix ^\s*[Ss]essions? \d, and the multiline [Ss]essions?\s*\n\s*\d) over the wiki except log.md, queue.md, open-questions.md, SCHEMA.md and index.md: no hits. Its process-wording search (this session|earlier session|[Ss]ession [^0-9], plus queue item) over the same files: only workshop "session" titles, which stay
• Phases, "Relation to the ADD": "No source so far maps … See SCHEMA's rule" with a link to SCHEMA.md, the only content-page link to it. Now a plain claim naming the search: none of the 2026 documents, decks or Moon Base pages names a segment beside the Moon Base (searched sources/moon-base, sources/linked and the 2026 text files for "segment" and the three lunar segment names: only Ignition deck 1's "Booster segments" and the two 2026 workshop decks, which don't mention the Moon Base). The same reword on Architecture framework
• About 40 source pages name SCHEMA in their opening lines without linking it: new open question 100
• the "so far" claims session 60 listed as unchecked, checked against sources/ and reworded:
  • Users Guide source page: "the only source so far that ties ADD gap IDs to Moon Base" holds (a search for gap, data-gap and function IDs in the Moon Base pages, linked pages and 2026 text files hits only the guide and the two 2026 workshop decks); now said without "so far", with the search
  • Building the Moon Base fact sheet: "the only source so far that gives the phases' dates, figures and contents together" was false: Ignition deck 2 does too. Reworded (the guide has figures without dates; the Moon Base Phases page has dates and no launch, landing or mass figures, searched)
  • Phase 1 functional gaps: "the most direct statement so far" now "the only source that states what Phase 1 must deliver by function ID" (same ID search)
  • the six Mars data-gap pages (DN-001 M to DN-006 M; session 60 counted five): "No source so far ties it to the Moon Base" now "No source ties it": the Mars data-gap IDs occur only in the two 2026 workshop decks, which don't mention the Moon Base
  • left alone: SCHEMA's own "Not established by the sources so far" (about 60 pages), and "so far" in other senses ("Done so far", "Revisions produced so far", measurements "so far")
• No "Session N additions" block and no "(session N)" phrasing found on the pages this section touched

Index rows put off by sessions 57 and 58, now done: CLPS, Gateway, HLS, Lunar Nuclear Fission System, LTV, SCaN Networks, Orion, SLS, xEVA (each with what sessions 57–58 added under "Changes since Rev C"); Environment, Missions and assets, Mars-forward; RT-2 (NextSTEP-3); Architecture definition process (HSMD's "Moon Base architecture gaps"); and short "paired by subject (the wiki's)" notes on #0103, #0804, #0502 and DN-017 L. Each was written from the page's own lines (read or searched), in the index's existing style with "(session N)" history. #0601's row is unchanged: session 58 only removed lines from that page.

Checked at the end: every ](sources/ link in the overview's body is in its Sources list (listed with a search); the new anchors resolve (#why-phased, #relation-to-the-add, #mars-items-announced-with-the-moon-base, RT-2's #changes-since-rev-c, #needs-the-sources-give-without-a-phase, and those copied from other pages); the new nested lists have a blank line before them.

After a final review: the fact sheet's source page no longer says only deck 2 also gives dates, figures and contents (other pages weren't all checked; it now says "so does Ignition deck 2"); Needs' "How to read this page" no longer says subject pairings are used only for Phases 2 and 3 (Phase 1 has them too); open question 97 has a note, and the overview's row and the Pressurized Rover page say that NASA's Moon Base Phases page keeps Rev C's "up to 28 days", so two 2026 NASA pages differ; the overview says "SCaN" (the organization) moves to RTMD, adds Directive 6's "including SCaN", and spells out "Space Reactor-1 (SR-1)" from the mission page's title. sources/text/pages was also searched: its two pages that mention the Moon Base name no segment and no gap ID, so the "no source" claims above stand.

For the next session: the queue has no unchecked item. Still open from the project's list: rerun tools/wiki/fix_lists.py on wiki/ (older nested lists on the overview and Needs have no blank line before them; this session left them as they were), regenerate wiki/sources/index.md, and open question 100 (SCHEMA named on about 40 source pages).

Session 60 — 2026-10-01 — Review fixes, part 2 (overview and needs), and "read so far"

Read: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; overview.md and moon-base/needs.md in full; the Ignition page's document table; the Ignition release's phase table; deck 2's source page (Phase 1 sums, slides 9–11, 17, 20–22); the glossary rows for the acronyms; open questions 53, 71, 74, 83, 85, 87–89, 92–94.

Updated:

• Overview, part 1 and the acronyms:
  • the Ignition material: "Ignition" explained (NASA's event of 24 March 2026); six fact sheets dated 24 March, and six decks, five listed on 26 March and the "NASA Inspires" recap with no date. The queue said "six … as listed 26 March"; the Ignition page's own table gives the recap no date, so the page says that
  • "What has changed since Rev C": the per-phase reading now carries its caveat, Phase 1's launches summing to 24 on slide 17 against 25 on slide 9 and in the guide (p. 4)
  • the Moon Base section: "None of them cites a function or gap ID", then which systems the sources name (CLPS in the guide's goals; the HLS in the Ignition release's Phase Three) and which the wiki matches by name (deck 2's LTVs, its slide 10 "Human Landing System" label, JAXA's rover), keeping session 59's labels
  • the "named in the Moon Base Users Guide (near-term)" label in the summary and the gaps bullet
  • the disagreements table: row 53 (Mercury flights) dropped; the lead-in no longer names SCHEMA; row 77's RFI and SMD spelled out
  • Sources: the 2025 Architecture Update, the 2024 technology-gaps paper and both 2024 architecture tables added (each was linked in the body but missing from the list; checked by listing every source link)
  • acronyms spelled out at first use: ADD, ACR, ISRU, PNT, NRHO, CLPS, LTV, HALO, LEO, ISS, RFI, SMD; "PSR" written out. The Lunar site selection sentence no longer points to question 92
• Needs, by phase, part 2 and the acronyms: a new summary (the 17 gaps NASA's traceability ties to 10 Phase 1 functions, 4 cited by the guide; deck 2's capability tables for Phases 2 and 3; none cites a function or gap ID); the "MB" sentence removed (no table on the page used the marker; searched); Ignition deck 2 added to Sources; ADD, CLPS and MT, HLS, LTV, PNT, ISRU, SCaN, HALO and RFI spelled out (CLPS first appears inside a quoted goal, so it is expanded in the summary); the "C&PNT" group cell now "Communications and PNT", the guide's group name used elsewhere on the page; question 74 no longer listed as open, and the talk report sentence states the rank
• open-questions.md, part 5: 71 and 93 marked settled as the queue item states (11,154 links and 2,288 anchors under MkDocs' default rule, checked with a script outside these runs; this session did not rerun it); 74, 83 (date part), 85, 87, 88, 89, 92 marked "Decided by the project lead, 2026-10-01" with the SCHEMA section. On 88 the marker says the rule adds no gap-page pointer lines; on 92 it says the rule doesn't mention the concept page, which is left as it is
• index.md: the Overview and Needs rows

Not done in the item's main pass: part 4 (open question 94, "the sources read so far" on nine pages). It is the next queue item, "Left from session 60", which also lists two more instances found by search (EGS l. 91, the 2025 Architecture Update's source page) and the xEMU sentence on #0803.

Surprising: the HLS finding in part 4 (below): the Administrator's speech ties Moon Base I to "Human Landing System missions", which no page had recorded. Row 53 was the only row in the table the newer-source rule settles; rows 79 and 82 still fit the new lead-in ("in most of them"), since the wiki records both sides of each.

After this entry (the "Left from session 60" item, ticked): each "read so far" claim was searched for in all of sources/ (text, moon-base, linked) and reworded as a plain claim that names what was searched:

• Human Landing System: the claim was false. "No source read so far ties [Blue Moon MK1] to the HLS" no longer holds: the Administrator's speech of 26 May 2026 says Moon Base I's "mission objective is to demonstrate critical capabilities that reduce risk for Human Landing System missions". The page now quotes it, ahead of the wiki's slide 10 match (source-made links first), and says no source makes the MK1 lander part of the HLS element. The phase cells on Needs and the elements index are unchanged: the speech ties a Phase One mission to HLS missions but doesn't put the HLS in a phase
• #0803: also false. "The ADD doesn't use the term xEMU": it does, in #0803's own Appendix D table (p. 238). Now "only in this gap's table … not on the element page"; Ignition deck 1's "Axiom xEMU" (slide 18) added, not tied to the gap. The xEVA page's sentence (about the element page, which was true) now says the same. Its Moon Base sentence names what was searched (Users Guide, Moon Base pages and releases, deck 2), with the two Moon Base pages that mention spacesuits in general
• EGS and SLS: no source newer than Rev C mentions Block 1B or Mobile Launcher 2; the Moon Base documents and pages don't name EGS or SLS; the 2026 sources that do (the workshop decks' images of ADD pages; Ignition deck 1, the Ignition release and fact sheet, the Artemis page, the Artemis III article, the 22 May note) speak of Artemis. The xEVA page notes deck 2's bare "EVA" label on slide 42. Needs' open points also drop question 73, decided like 74. The SLS page gains the Artemis page's and the 22 May note's standardization lines; a note on open question 25
• Lunar Surface Cargo Lander and Lunar Utility Rover: "None: no source newer than Rev C says anything new"; the only 2026 mentions are the ADD page thumbnails on the workshops' "Product Revitalization" slide (January slide 6; February slides 6 and 22). Under SCHEMA's "Changes since Rev C … present only where one bears on the page", these two sections could be dropped; the item asked for a reword, so they stay
• RT-1: only the ADD mentions the Artemis III dielectric analyzer
• Objectives: no 2026 source mentions a revision of the 2022 set
• 2025 Architecture Update: "the fullest account in the wiki's sources so far" of MD-05 was false (the 2024 crew complement paper is four pages on it); reworded
• open question 94 marked done, with the other "so far" phrasings found by a wider search and not checked: "No source so far maps ADD segments" (Segments index, Architecture framework, Moon Base hub, Phases); "No source so far ties it to the Moon Base" (five Mars data-gap pages); "the only source so far" on the Users Guide and Building the Moon Base fact sheet source pages (the fact sheet's "only source … that gives the phases' dates, figures and contents together" may be false now that deck 2 and Moon Base Systems are held); "the most direct statement so far" on Phase 1 functional gaps. SCHEMA's own "Not established by the sources so far" is left alone

For the next session: item 100 (final pass) is next. It owns the new Moon Base sources on the overview and needs pages (realignment, Moon Base Systems, NextSTEP-3, LEIA, SR-1); this session left them alone. The unchecked "so far" claims above could go in item 100's "reads as a finished page" check, or a later lint.

Session 59 — 2026-10-01 — Review fixes, part 1 (slide pages and topic pages)

Read: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; the January 2026 deck's slide 46 (text and image); the text of slide 6 in both February 2025 primaries and slide 13 of the February 2024 overview deck; slide 12 of both Architecture 101 decks (images); Users Guide pp. 12–13 (text, against the challenges page's table, which was checked against the PDF when it was written); the Ignition release's Phase Three paragraph; Ignition deck 2's slide 10 and 47 text; the Ion talk report; the pages each fix touches.

Fixed (all seven parts of the item, each checked against its source first):

1. Data gaps index, "Briefed at the January 2026 workshop": the roundtable had five panelists, three from NASA (Morris-Eckart, Needham, John), one NASA-SSERVI, one Intuitive Machines. The source page's slide 46 row already had it right.
2. "Two days later" removed from Phases ("Phase names"), Needs (open points) and the Phases row in index.md. They now say deck 2 is listed on 26 March 2026; Phases points to the deck's "Oddities" for the wiki's reading that it was presented on Ignition day. A note on open question 83.
3. January 2026 deck, slide 44: "still to be read" replaced. "Decomposition of Blueprint Objectives to executing Architecture elements", under "Traceability", is on slide 13 of the February 2024 overview deck and slide 6 of both February 2025 decks (Architecture Updates, Architecture 101) and their copies. None of them expands "Blueprint" either.
4. Architecture 101, international copy: slide 12 added. Same text, but the white-paper thumbnails differ: a dark-blue sidebar reading "2024 Moon to Mars Architecture" and "white paper" on the front one, where the industry deck's have plain white edges.
5. Thirteen associated challenges, not twelve, on Technology and knowledge challenges, Needs and also Priorities, which had the same "Twelve". Four cite no data gap, not three (timing systems cites only #0101), on Needs and the data gaps index. The challenges page's own table always had 13 rows; only the prose counts were wrong. The index row for the challenges page now gives the counts.
6. Needs, "At a glance": CLPS now in the Phase 2 and 3 cells (the guide's 5MT and 8MT goals, p. 4); HLS in Phase 1 (labeled on Ignition deck 2's Phase 1 render, slide 10) and Phase Three (the Ignition release's "cargo‑capable human landing systems"), with citations under the table. The same in the "Elements" table on Needs and in the elements index row (now "Source names it (Ignition release)", with slide 10's label as the wiki's match). The index draws on each element page's Moon Base relevance, so HLS gets one sentence there on slide 10 (its Phase Three paragraph was already in place). The elements index's CLPS row already had the 5MT and 8MT goals.
7. Needs: "five of the six #04xx gaps" (there are six, #0401 to #0406); "The guide leaves out two of the top six, #1107 and #1104"; the Ion talk's speaker named (Shatel Bhakta, the Moon Base Program's principal systems engineer); open question 6 described as settled apart from Phase 1's 24 launches against the guide's 25.

Checked after a review of the session's work: slide 10's "Human Landing System" label is now marked "the wiki's match by name" wherever it is used (Needs twice, the elements index, the HLS page, the HLS index row), following the LTV precedent; the Ignition release's "cargo‑capable human landing systems" stays source-named. The 2024 deck's slide 13 image confirms the "Traceability" placement, and the 2024 deck has no copy, so the sentence now says "both 2025 decks' copies". "Blueprint" occurs once in each of the three decks (searched), so none expands it. No other page still says the HLS has no Moon Base phase (searched index.md and moon-base/).

Surprising: nothing new in the sources. Slide 47 of deck 2 ("Large Cargo Landers", drawing on the HLS for cargo with human-class delivery landers) carries no phase, so it was not used for the HLS phase cells. It is already on the Human-Class Delivery Lander page and Phases.

For the next session (item 99, review fixes part 2): Needs still carries the "MB" marker sentence (l. 50) and a summary that predates deck 2; both are item 99's. Its summary's "with no function, gap or element named" (l. 16) is about the fact sheet and still true, but item 99's rewrite should not repeat it for deck 2, which names CLPS, HLS, LTV and JAXA's rover.

Session 58 — 2026-10-01 — Moon Base solicitations, missions and technology pages

Read: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; all twelve web pages in full; the CLPS timeline graphic from the raw PDF page as an image (its text layer prints the year labels out of order); the topic pages they bear on (Surface technology, Missions and assets, Mars-forward, HLS, RT-2's NextSTEP sections, the Moon Base Solicitations source page).

Created: thirteen source pages:

• NextSTEP-3 A, the draft-input article and the September release: the Lunar Enabling Infrastructure Accelerator (LEIA). The release's solicitation is the Moon Base Solicitations page's "Lunar Surface Technologies" (same name, same five areas; the wiki's match)
• NextSTEP-3 B, HSMD's "Moon Base Demonstrations", with its nine topics compared by name with the sub-architectures (labeled)
• the 5G contract, the lander communications challenge, CAPSTONE
• SR-1 Freedom, against the fact sheet and deck 5
• plume-surface tests, LESTR, the Moon manufacturing material
• Artemis III plans
• the CLPS timeline graphic, dated July 2025 by its upload path

Updated: queue.md (item 96 ticked; a "Left from session 58" item for the topic pages); index.md (thirteen source rows). Topic pages: see below.

Surprising:

• LEIA's gaps are STMD's, not the ADD's. The draft-input article says the five topics address gaps "as identified in NASA's Civil Space Shortfalls". Under SCHEMA (questions 85, 87) they stay off the gap pages, although the topics (solar arrays, oxygen from regolith, manufacturing) share subjects with #0901, #0601 and #0502.
• "Moon Base architecture gaps". HSMD's NextSTEP-3 Appendix B is the only source with this phrase. It cites no ADD gap, no ADD and no architecture office, which is the realignment's silence again.
• Appendix B's address changed. The January 2026 workshop linked nextstep-3-b-moon-to-mars-architecture-studies; the page now held is nextstep-3-b-moon-base-demonstrations. Neither source says it was retitled.
• SR-1 and the Moon Base. The mission page says SR-1 will "prove fission surface power technology for NASA's Moon Base", a closer tie than the fact sheet's (LR-1 only). Missions and assets says flatly that SR-1 "is not a Moon Base asset"; the left item rewords that.
• The CLPS graphic. The years of its seven planned deliveries have to be read off an axis that isn't to scale. The wiki's reading puts Blue Moon MK1 and Griffin in 2025, so they have slipped by the 2026 sources. Draper Mission 1, IM-4 and Blue Ghost Mission 3 are in no other source.
• Artemis III settled: SLS flies with a spacer instead of the ICPS (Ignition deck 1 had "TBD: ICPS OR spacer", slide 12), and the landers are "pathfinder" vehicles, Starship and Blue Moon Mark 2 (deck 1 also names the "Blue Moon MK2 crew lander").

After this entry (the "Left from session 58" item, ticked):

• RT-2: the stale "the page is not among the sources" on the Appendix B bullet replaced (the NextSTEP-3 B page is held, at another address; a retitling is the wiki's reading); a new "NextSTEP-3, mid-2026" block for Appendices A and B, named NextSTEP-3 throughout, with the ADD's p. 88 future areas as the wiki's comparison
• Architecture definition process, realignment section: HSMD's "Moon Base architecture gaps" bullet; the NextSTEP-3 pages added to the silence sentence
• Surface technology: the solicitation as LEIA, with dates and the Civil Space Shortfalls line; NextSTEP-3 B; 5G and the student challenge; a new section, "Ground tests and materials at NASA centers" (plume tests, LESTR, the bio-plastic), pairings labeled. Priorities section 5 and the Moon Base Solicitations source page get the same identification
• CLPS: "The CLPS timeline graphic (July 2025)"
• Missions and assets, "Other context": SR-1 reworded (no source lists it as a Moon Base asset; its page says it will "prove fission surface power technology for NASA's Moon Base"); CAPSTONE (2022) against CAPSTONE 02; a pointer to the CLPS graphic
• Mars-forward and Lunar Nuclear Fission System: the SR-1 page's figures, objectives and LR-1 wording
• SCaN Networks: CAPSTONE's autoNGC and DTN, the 5G contract, the student challenge
• HLS, Orion, SLS, xEVA: the Artemis III article (SLS's spacer settles deck 1's "TBD: ICPS OR spacer"; the upgraded heat shield kept apart from deck 1's "Permeable Heatshield"); on HLS also the plume tests and the challenge
• Labeled same-subject paragraphs: #0103 (5G with Wi-Fi 6 is LD-103's 2025 choice; child gap 0103-03 for the propagation measurements), DN-017 L (ground tests, not the gap's in situ data type), #0804 (40 K against ~20–30 K), #0502 (and #0702)
• #0502 and #0601 carried session 1's lines setting the solicitation's "in-space manufacturing" and "oxygen production from lunar regolith" beside them, "without citing a gap ID". Now that NASA ties those topics to its Civil Space Shortfalls, SCHEMA's rule (questions 85, 87: don't match lists that name no architecture gap, the shortfalls among them, to the gaps by title; keep them on their source pages) applies, so the lines were removed from both gap pages, with their Moon Base Solicitations citations. The solicitation stays on Surface technology, Priorities and its source pages. #0502 keeps the bio-plastic paragraph, a labeled same-subject pairing from another source.
• open-questions.md, "Session 58": notes on 10 (the solicitation identified; the SAM.gov documents still not held) and 78 (the graphic says Astrobotic). No new question.

Index rows: Surface technology's and CLPS's were extended for the new sections; the other topic pages' rows were not changed, and item 99's final pass on index.md can pick them up.

Checked at the end: every "in no other source" claim on the new pages was searched for in sources/, not just wiki/. That search corrected three: the Blue Moon MK2 and "ICPS OR spacer" (both in Ignition deck 1) and the PPE's 48 kW (deck 5's "Up to 48KW"). Draper Mission 1, IM-4, Blue Ghost Mission 3 and "Moon Base architecture gaps" are each in one source only. Every anchor the session added matches a heading.

For the next session (item 97, review fixes part 1): nothing from this session touches its seven fixes. Item 99 owns overview.md and moon-base/needs.md; the session 58 sources (LEIA, NextSTEP-3 B, SR-1's Moon Base line) are among what it should weigh.

Session 57 — 2026-10-01 — Moon Base program and policy pages

Read: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; the seven sources in full (Moon Base Systems, Media Resources, the Administrator's speech of 26 May and workforce note of 22 May, the realignment release, the HSMD page, the podcast transcript); the raw HTML of Moon Base Systems for its phase headings; the topic pages the sources bear on (Moon Base hub, Phases, Architecture definition process, the May 2026 release's source page, open questions 82 and 94).

Created: seven source pages:

• Moon Base Systems. The text file drops every phase heading (empty ###); the raw HTML has them as accordion headings ("Phase One" to "Phase Three"), so each block's phase is the page's own. Habitation and Logistics have no Phase One block
• Media Resources, used for dating
• the Administrator's speech, 26 May, cited directly (his own text), not "as reported"
• the Administrator's workforce note, 22 May, with all ten directives summarized; Directive 9 (aviation, the 737 reduced-gravity platform) kept as one bare line, since it has no architecture bearing
• the realignment release
• the HSMD page
• the podcast, García-Galán cited "as reported"

Updated:

• Architecture definition process: a new section, "Changes since Rev C: the May 2026 realignment" (ESDMD and SOMD unified as HSMD; Artemis "renamed from Moon to Mars"; Directive 6's "exploration architecture" and "integrated lunar architecture and operations plan"; nuclear and SCaN in RTMD). It says plainly that none of these sources mentions the Strategy and Architecture Office, the ADD or the review, and records that as silence
• Phases: "On the Moon Base Systems page", a table of what the page adds to deck 2 and what it doesn't list (the wiki's comparison); Directive 6's 2030 date and LR-1's in "A 2030 date"; the podcast's phases, as reported; the note's six-month crewed cadence under Cadence. The "two days later" wording is left for item 96
• Moon Base hub: "The program" and "Systems by phase" key facts; all seven sources in its Sources list, so each new source page has a topic-page link
• open-questions.md: 95 (Ignition on 23 or 24 March: the speech against everything else), 96 (Apollo EVA hours: "80" in the speech and podcast, "~159" in the February 2024 briefing), with the temperature differences recorded under 96 as no question
• index.md: seven source rows; the hub, Phases and Architecture definition process rows

Surprising:

• "Artemis … (renamed from Moon to Mars)". The program this wiki is named after is, as an organization, now "Artemis" within HSMD. Only the workforce note says so; the release and HSMD page just list "Artemis".
• The Moon Base Program gets an architecture remit. Directive 6 asks it to integrate "exploration architecture" and write "an integrated lunar architecture and operations plan", and the program manager says "our architecture team" is matching RFI ideas "to technology gaps". No source links that plan to the ADD.
• SCaN sits in RTMD, yet Directive 6 gives the Moon Base Program authority "across all lunar missions, including SCaN". Both quoted; not reconciled.
• Moon Base Systems has no ISRU area, where deck 2 has one, and no Phase 2 reactor demonstration.

After this entry (the "Left from session 57" item, ticked):

• Pressurized Rover: the Systems page's "up to 30 days" against Rev C's "up to 28 days" (p. 63), both recorded, the web page newer; new open question 97. Its other figures match deck 2's
• Lunar Terrain Vehicle: the Systems page's LTV figures and phase plan; the podcast's LTVs meeting the Artemis IV crew; a session 57 note on open question 82 (the page prints "up to six miles (10 kilometers) per hour" and Pegasus's "more than 9 mph" a few lines apart)
• Gateway: Directive 6 ("the current Gateway surface relevant scope" to the Moon Base Program), Directive 7 (PPE and Gateway launch-services funding to SR-1), the podcast's HALO and Canadarm reuse
• Lunar Nuclear Fission System: Directive 7 (Space Reactor Office in RTMD; LR-1 "ready for launch by 2030"; radioisotope sources), the Systems page's Phase Three fission power, the podcast's "up to like 100 kilowatts"
• SCaN Networks: the Systems page's communications plan; SCaN in RTMD beside Directive 6's authority "including SCaN"
• CLPS: "The pages don't say whether the program has moved" is now answered by Directive 6 (consolidated into the Moon Base Program); the podcast's 500 kg to "five to eight metric tons"
• Missions and assets: the speech's three additions
• Environment: "surviving the shadow", the habitat a mile from the landing site, and the speech's and podcast's temperatures, kept out of the table
• After a final review: the podcast's later timing for the first missions ("one this year, and multiple next year"; FLIP "perhaps … next year") beside the speech's "before the end of 2026" on Missions and assets and the podcast's source page, open question 98; open question 99 on citing the Administrator's own posted texts directly (the wiki does so pending an answer); notes on questions 77 (Directive 6's "by 2030"), 9 (Artemis IV in Phase 1, as reported) and 78 (the speech and podcast also say Astrobotic); the Moon Base Systems page's likeness to deck 2 and its May dating labeled as the wiki's. A search of the seven source files for "Strategy and Architecture", "SAO", "Architecture Definition", "Concept Review" and "ADD" found nothing, so the "none of these sources mentions" sentences stand.
• Index rows for these element pages were not changed except Pressurized Rover's (the 30 days); item 98's final pass on index.md can pick the others up.

For the next session (item 95, solicitations, missions and technology pages): the NextSTEP-3 pages may name HSMD or RTMD; if they say anything about the architecture office or the ADD after the realignment, add it to the new section on Architecture definition process. Item 98 owns overview.md and moon-base/needs.md for these sources; they were left alone.

Session 56 — 2026-10-01 — Finished pages, part B: session-number phrasing on gap, data-gap and source pages

Read: schema, index (first part), the last three log entries, queue; every line matching the session-55 searches in gaps/, data-gaps/ and sources/, each with its paragraph.

How it was done: the line search ^[^u].*[Ss]essions? \d|^u[^p].*[Ss]essions? \d|^up[^d].*[Ss]essions? \d (skips updated: lines) and the multiline search [Ss]essions?\s*\n\s*\d. Mentions that only dated the work were dropped; "PDF checked" notes and page lists were kept.

The line search has a blind spot, found at the end of the session: ^[^u] uses up a line's first letter, so a line that begins "Session N" or "session N" (a mention wrapped onto a new line) never matches. Add ^\s*[Ss]essions? \d. Run over the whole wiki except log.md, queue.md, open-questions.md and SCHEMA.md, it found one more mention (the 2025 Update, "checked in" / "session 11", now fixed) and one index history line, which stays. So session 55's folders were clean after all. Use both patterns, plus the multiline one, in any later lint.

A third search for other process wording ([Ss]ession [^0-9], "this session", "earlier session") found three more, reworded below. The rest of its hits are workshop "sessions" and "Breakout Session" titles, which stay. After the fixes the line and multiline searches find nothing outside updated: in the three folders, and a search for leftover punctuation (empty or half-empty parentheses) finds none. No heading changed, so no anchor moved.

Updated (each page's updated: line set to session 56):

• gaps/: #0202, #0308, #0401–#0404 ("Against the Mars decomposition (session 23)" → "Against the Mars decomposition"), #0902 (five "added session N" tags, two wrapped across lines), #1107 (two italic lead-ins: "The use case's own title:", "In the Mars decomposition:"), #1106 (below), the gaps index (two)
• data-gaps/: only the index had mentions (four)
• ADD Rev C source page: the contents table's "Read, session N" labels (the B.2 cell now has sub-labels "B.1 and the lunar lists", "The Mars lists", "The lunar spreadsheet", "B.3 to B.5"; "Session 13 used p. 147 for #1107" → "#1107 cites p. 147"), and the session tags on the extraction-note and slips bullets
• the other 26 source pages:
  • Reference tables ("(session 27)", "(session 17)", "(session 25)" after "yes, [source page]"): the 2024 lunar mobility, international partnerships, tech gaps, lunar reference frames and priority science papers; the 2025 lunar power, C&PNT and Why Moon and Mars papers
  • Dated tags dropped: both decomposition pages, the tech and data gap spreadsheets, the data-gaps and architecture definition papers, both executive overviews, the strategy document, the White Papers page, the 2025 Update, the Ignition release, the nuclear fact sheet, the Users Guide, the 2024 lunar table
  • Correction-style notes reworded as plain statements: "Session 26: … do contain the layer" (lunar and Mars decomposition pages) → "… contain the layer"; "When session 16 read it, no other source read had done so" (lunar decomposition) removed, leaving the 2022 document's matching wording; "the FN-C-103 L pairing that session 16 found unexplained" → "which the 2025 sheet doesn't explain" (2024 lunar table); "Session 14 confirmed it" → "The ADD confirms it" (data-gaps paper); the 2025 Update's "ADD pages read when this page was written (pp. 1–104, session 9)" → "the ADD pages this page was first compared with (pp. 1–104)", which keeps the claim's original scope
  • Process wording without a number: "opened this session" → "opened for this page" (Ignition deck 1); "the session-1 copy" and "as earlier sessions did" (the plain-name Going Back page)

Stale claims found on the way, fixed:

• The data gaps spreadsheet's source page said the Mars objective codes "wait for the Mars decomposition". The Mars decomposition is in the wiki, and the three Mars-only codes (MI-04 M, TH-06 M, TH-07 M) are rows on Mars objectives. The line now points there.
• #1106 said what UC-I-102 L covers "is left to the ADD session on use cases and functions". That reading is done; the line now points to Lunar use cases and Mars use cases for ADD Rev C's titles.

Not changed: sources/index.md (generated; its "not written by an AI session" line is the script's); the index's history lines (left alone, as item 85 says); index.md rows (no page or section was added or removed).

For the next session: the queue has no unchecked item. Item 80's finished-pages pass is complete across the wiki: no content page carries session-number phrasing outside updated: and the index's history lines. Open question 94 (nine pages' "the sources read so far" claims) is the related work still waiting on the project lead, along with the post-run tasks in CLAUDE.md (rerun tools/wiki/fix_lists.py, regenerate wiki/sources/index.md).

Session 55 — 2026-10-01 — Finished pages, part A: session-number phrasing on the topic pages

Read:

• schema, index (first part), the last three log entries, queue
• every line matching [Ss]essions? \d in concepts/, objectives/, segments/, sub-architectures/, elements/, moon-base/, glossary.md and overview.md, each with its paragraph
• to check one claim before keeping it: a search of all of sources/ for "lava tube" (Environment says ADD Rev C, the Users Guide, the gap spreadsheets and the white papers don't mention lava tubes. That still holds: the hits are the PRISM release, NASA's surface technology page and ASI's poster)

How it was done: a search for [Ss]essions? \d on lines that don't start with updated:, then each hit read in its paragraph and reworded. A second search, for [Ss]ession not followed by a number, found only open-question anchors (#session-N-2026-10-01), source file names with "breakout-session", and workshop "sessions". Those are not session-number phrasing and stay. A third, multiline search ([Ss]essions?\s*\n\s*\d) found one mention wrapped across a line break ("(session" / "26)", Use cases and functions), which the line search can't see. After the fixes all three searches find nothing outside updated:. These folders hold no "Session N additions" block, and the glossary and overview carry no session number outside updated:.

Updated: 63 mentions on 26 pages, each page's updated: line set to session 55:

• Dropped where the parenthesis only dated the work ("(session 24)", "(session 16)", "read in session 18", "checked in session 4", ", session 23"): Human Lunar Return, Foundational Exploration, Humans to Mars, ISRU Systems, C&PNT Systems, Lunar functions, Lunar use cases, Recurring tenets, Objective decomposition, RT-1, Use cases and functions, Mars use cases, Key definition tasks, Lunar Utility Rover, CLPS, Lunar objectives, Mars objectives, Lunar function allocation, Technology and knowledge challenges, Phase 1 functional gaps, Needs, Environment, the elements index
• Italic lead-ins that worked like "Session N additions" headers, reworded by what follows: "Session 15:" → "In Appendix B's lists:" and "Session 16, confirmed by a source:" → "Confirmed by a source:" (sub-architectures index); "Session 24, the rest of Appendix B:" → "In the rest of Appendix B:" (Lunar Nuclear Fission System, Lunar Utility Rover); "Session 15:" removed before the FN-P-102 L title note (fission system); "Session 32, from …" and "Session 33, from …" → "From …" (HLS)
• Reworded as plain statements:
  • Lunar objectives: "Correction to session 16. This page said … That was wrong when written" is now "Which of the eleven the ADD names", stating that ADD Rev C names all ten Mars-only objectives (LPS-4 on p. 37, the rest on p. 38) and not AS-2. The history stays here: the page once said the sources named nine of the eleven
  • Use cases and functions: "Session 15 read this from the lists" → "The lists show it"; "(sessions 12–13; …)" → "(pp. 199–260; …)", Appendix D's own pages
  • Mars use cases: "Session 15 checked pp. 130–134 against the PDF" → those pages "are checked against the PDF" because their text layer separates IDs from titles
  • the elements index: "since session 9, the wiki joins by shared function ID … Since session 24 every element has been checked" → the three kinds of link, and "Every element is checked by function ID against ADD Appendix B.3"
  • Objective decomposition: "All of Appendix B is now read:" → "Where Appendix B is in the wiki:"; Key definition tasks: "Appendix C, now read in full," → "Appendix C"
  • Lunar use cases: "not added: no queue item covers them" → "This page has no objective or function columns; the objective pages carry those links" (question 44, decided by the project lead)
• queue.md: item 84 ticked
• open-questions.md: new 94, nine pages' "the sources read so far" claims (below)
• index.md: no row changed. No page or section was added or removed, and the item leaves the index's history lines alone

Surprising:

• Most mentions were in the oldest pages (sessions 15–26: Appendix B, the decomposition spreadsheets), written before the "finished pages" rule. Material from sessions 31–53 had few: CLPS, HLS, the Lunar Utility Rover and Environment, all from sessions 31–33.
• Stale "read so far" claims. A search for other process wording found nine topic pages that still say "the sources read so far" (Lunar Surface Cargo Lander, Lunar Utility Rover, Exploration Ground Systems, Exploration EVA System, HLS, SLS three times, RT-1, Objectives). They were written before the workshop, Ignition and Moon Base sources were in, and at least one may now be false: EGS's "The Moon Base sources read so far don't name EGS" (Moon Base relevance) sits on a page whose "Changes since Rev C" quotes Ignition deck 1 on EGS (slides 12, 15). Rewording them needs a check against all sources, not a phrasing change, and whether an Ignition deck counts as a "Moon Base source" is not settled, so they went to the project lead as open question 94 rather than into the queue. "Not established by the sources so far" is the SCHEMA's own wording for Moon Base relevance and stays.

For the next session (item 85, part B: gaps/, data-gaps/, sources/): use the same line search, ^[^u].*[Ss]essions? \d|^u[^p].*[Ss]essions? \d|^up[^d].*[Ss]essions? \d (it skips updated: lines), plus the multiline one, [Ss]essions?\s*\n\s*\d, for mentions wrapped across a line break. Expect more hits on source pages, where "checked in session N" notes are common. Open-question anchors such as #session-33-2026-10-01 and file names containing "breakout-session" are not session-number phrasing; leave them.

Session 54 — 2026-10-01 — Lint: the anchors session 53 didn't check

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• the headings of every page an anchor link points into: all sixteen element pages, the five segment pages, all thirteen sub-architecture pages, both gap indexes, the gap and data-gap pages that anchors target (#0101, #0301, #0605, #1107, DN-007 L, DN-016 L, DN-017 L), the glossary, the overview, open-questions (session headings and question numbers), all seven objectives pages, the eighteen concept pages that anchors point into or that carry same-page anchors, the Moon Base hub, needs, missions and Phase 1 pages, and the source pages that are anchor targets (about 60)
• ADD Rev C's text at 2.3.4.2.1, to see whether the Canadarm3 heading is NASA's own title (it is)
• a search of the whole project (not only wiki/) for mkdocs.yml and for any MkDocs or slug configuration

How the check was done (no shell, so by search): for each target group, every anchor link was dumped with -o (one line per link, so two links on one line are both checked, unlike session 53's per-line count) and read against the target page's headings, slugged by the MkDocs default rule (Python-Markdown's toc slugify: lower case, non-ASCII dropped, punctuation other than hyphens dropped, any run of spaces and hyphens made one hyphen). The rule is applied as known, not checked against the code; nothing in the project holds it. Groups checked:

• everything item 82 named: anchors into elements/ (200 cross-folder links plus 51 within the folder), segments/, sub-architectures/, both gap indexes, the glossary, the overview (no anchor link points into it) and open-questions; and every same-page anchor (](#…)) in the wiki, about 470, not only on pages from sessions 31–53
• groups no lint pass had covered: anchors into objectives/ (cross-folder and within), the concept pages other than the tenets, definition tasks, definition process, decomposition and site selection (use cases and functions, the four list pages, Why Moon to Mars, Architecture framework, Planetary protection), the gap and data-gap pages, the source pages from sessions 1–30, and source-to-source links (about 90)
• every open-questions.md#session-N-2026-10-01 link (about 150) against the question number in its link text: each lands in the section that holds its question. RT-8's link (question 81, session 33) is right

Updated:

• The one broken anchor, used twice: Gateway's component table and the elements index's partner table linked #gateway-external-robotic-system--canadarm3. The heading, "Gateway External Robotic System / Canadarm3", is ADD Rev C's own (2.3.4.2.1) and stays. Under the default rule the slash and its spaces collapse to one hyphen, so both links now use #gateway-external-robotic-system-canadarm3. The double hyphen is what a GitHub-style rule gives; this is the only anchor in the wiki where the two rules differ
• open-questions.md: new 93, the site's slug rule (no mkdocs.yml in the project; confirm the default, or the two links go back)
• queue.md: item 82 ticked for the anchors and mkdocs.yml; the index-row check split into a new item below it

Surprising:

• One broken anchor in well over a thousand. The earlier sessions slugged headings consistently by hand, including the awkward ones: en dashes in slide ranges (slides-5559), "&" in C&PNT, "+" in "FE+", quotation marks, colons.
• No mkdocs.yml anywhere in the project. The site config lives with the publishing site, outside this folder.

After this entry (the "Left from session 54" item, index rows, ticked):

• Method. Each topic row in the item's list (Moon Base, elements, RT-1, -2, -3, -7, -8, -9, Key definition tasks, Architecture definition process, both gap indexes, the overview paragraph, segments, sub-architectures, plus Science objectives) read against its page's headings from the anchor check, looking for a section the row names that the page lacks, or a whole section the row leaves out. Source rows: a search of index.md for stale markers ("queued", "next session", "not yet read", "still to"), then the session 31–53 source rows read in full, plus the two rows whose pages session 49 corrected
• Fixed in index.md:
  • the 2023 Executive Overview row said its 13 white papers were "none held"; the source page now says "Lunar Site Selection" is held. Now "one held"
  • the White Papers page row named only the 18 papers of 2024–2025 as held; it now adds the 2023 "Lunar Site Selection", filed with the February 2024 briefings, as its source page says
  • four topic rows that left out a section: CLPS (the February 2025 "CLPS Overview"), RT-3 and RT-9 (their "Changes since Rev C"), Science objectives and the decadal surveys (SMD's February 2024 "1:1 Trace")
• No row names a section its page lacks. Left as they are (older, small omissions, outside the item's list): Sustained Lunar Evolution's row doesn't mention its "In the recurring tenet assessments" section; C&PNT's doesn't mention "The 2025 Architecture Update"; Surface technology's doesn't mention "Flight and test results"
• Looked like a conflict, isn't: the deck 2 source row gives Phase 3 as "2033–2036", the Phases row "from 2032 or 2033". The deck's source page records both: slide 5's start against slide 30's figures box, "2033–2036" (recorded as printed). Both rows stand
• the rows' "(session N)" history lines were left as they are, as the item says

For the next session (item 83, finished pages, part A): nothing from this session bears on it. Not checked, by design: duplicate headings on one page (MkDocs would suffix the second _1); none was seen in the heading lists read here.

Session 53 — 2026-10-01 — Lint of the pages from sessions 31–51

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• the headings of every source page the anchors point into (Ignition decks 1–5, the Building the Moon Base fact sheet, the Ignition page, both 2026 workshop decks, eleven February 2025 and eight February 2024 pages), of the eight Moon Base pages and of the fourteen concept pages with anchors pointing in
• in full: the source pages for Ignition deck 6, the February 2025 crew-complement, EDL and science briefings, and the copies of Architecture 101, Program Office updates and logistics; the Humans to Mars hub table, RT-8's "Changes since Rev C", Utilization Systems' February 2025 section

How the checks were done (no shell in these sessions, so by search):

• Orphans. Every source page's file name searched in index.md (all 131 are there) and in the topic folders plus overview.md and glossary.md.
• File links. For each folder, the number of lines linking into it ([(/]elements/….md) was compared with the number linking to a file that exists there (an alternation of the folder's real file names); the same for links within a folder and for ../overview.md and the like. Every pair matched: 614, 792, 356, 493, 302, 2,879 (sources), 975 (gaps), 277 (data gaps), 381 (root pages), and the within-folder counts. Moon Base: 505 against 483; the 22 others are plain-text paths (sources/moon-base/….md) on source pages, not links. Gap and data-gap links were also searched for numbers outside the real ranges: none. Limit: the count is per line, so a line with one good and one broken link into the same folder would pass.
• Anchors. Slugs computed by the MkDocs rule (lower case, punctuation and dashes dropped, spaces to hyphens). Checked: the eight anchors the session 52 log named; all 198 anchor links into the session 31–51 source pages; all anchor links into the Moon Base pages other than the hub; all 275 anchor links into the concept pages (RT-1 to RT-9, key definition tasks, definition process, objective decomposition, lunar site selection, recurring tenets), counted against the valid slugs in one file of matches. All match.

Updated:

• Orphans fixed (each source page now has a topic-page link):
  • Humans to Mars: a paragraph under the ACR24 papers table on the February 2025 briefings of three of the four (power, crew complement, EDL), with both copies; the ascent paper has none
  • Utilization Systems: SMD's "Human Exploration Enables Science" briefing and its copy, what the slides add
  • RT-8: Ignition deck 6's recap line on the core module, stated without deck 3's "alternate"
  • partners' copies linked beside their primaries: Program Office updates on Human Lunar Return, Architecture 101 on RT-1, logistics on Lunar Terrain Vehicle
  • each of these six pages now lists the newly cited source pages in its sources: frontmatter and its Sources line; three older omissions found on the way were added too (the February 2024 Program Office deck on Human Lunar Return, the in situ briefing on Utilization Systems, the ISS lessons briefing on RT-8)
• Overview, as the session 52 log asked: the bullets in "What the workshop briefings add" and "Low Earth orbit" that cited only a wiki topic page now also cite the source page and slide (Rev B's list, slide 5; the integrated gaps, slides 4–5; the seven Mars decisions, slides 6–13; MD-07's working, slides 2–13; the first pre-formulation charts, slides 5–6; the 36,000–40,000 kg lander, slide 5; the LEO fact sheet and deck 3, slides 8, 10, 17, 18), with frontmatter and Sources line to match
• index.md: the opening line now says question 72 groups questions 1–71 (it said "all of them"; there are 92); the Humans to Mars, Utilization Systems and RT-8 rows
• queue.md (item 81 ticked)

Surprising:

• No broken file link anywhere in the wiki, and no broken anchor among the 500 or so checked. The orphans were all briefings that add little to papers already read, and copies whose primaries were linked.
• Older frontmatter gaps. Three topic pages cited February 2024 briefings in their text but not in sources:. Other pages may have the same gap; a frontmatter-against-text check is not in any queue item.

For the next session: the anchors left unchecked are in a new queue item right below item 81 (elements, segments, sub-architectures, the gap and data-gap indexes, glossary, overview, open questions, and same-page anchors), with the method. The same item carries item 81's "index rows that no longer match their pages": this session fixed only the opening line on question 72 and didn't check the rows. The slug rule assumed is MkDocs' default; mkdocs.yml was not looked at (it is outside wiki/). The index's "(session N)" history lines and the session-number phrasing on content pages are items 82 and 83's job, not lint's. No new open question: nothing found needed the project lead.

Session 52 — 2026-10-01 — Synthesis (part): what the workshops, the Ignition material and the new Moon Base pages add

Read:

• schema, index (first part), the last three log entries, queue
• overview.md in full; the workshops section of Architecture definition process; Needs, by phase (opening and "At a glance"); open questions 5, 6, 9, 10, 74–82 in full and the headings of all 92
• for facts and citations: Gateway's "Changes since Rev C"; Phases ("Figures per phase"); CLPS (cadence, CLPS 2.0); Lunar Terrain Vehicle (May 2026 selection, the contract change); the deck 2 source page's headings; the gaps index on Rev B's list; RT-7's standards table; the habitat and cargo-lander quotations
• a search of both 2026 workshop decks' text for "Moon Base" (none)

Updated:

• Overview:
  • "The current documents" now names the Ignition and Moon Base material and the workshop slides, with their rank
  • the Moon Base section's Phases 2 and 3: what the fact sheet and deck 2 say each phase brings (no IDs; matches the wiki's)
  • "What has changed since Rev C" rewritten: the stale "What becomes of Gateway itself, none of the sources says" replaced by the pause, SR-1, HALO reuse and deck 2's "not required"; per-phase figures and "$10 BILLION"; five sets of phase names; CLPS cadence and CLPS 2.0; the LTV selection and its one-year design life; LR-1 with SR-1 first; named missions; the LEO plan
  • a new section, "What the workshop briefings add": before Rev C (Rev B's ranked list, integrated gaps, Mars decisions, pre-formulation charts, the figures of open questions 86 and 91), the held 2023 site-selection paper (question 92), after Rev C (MD-05's third wording, standards and specifications, partner posters)
  • the contradictions table: rows for 5 and 76, 77, 79, 82; 28 extended; the intro now points to question 72 for 1–71 only
  • frontmatter sources: and the Sources line. Ignition deck 1 is not cited (open question 80)
• Needs, by phase: the stale "doesn't say whether its numbers are per phase" paragraph now gives deck 2's per-year tables (per phase; Phase 1's 24 against 25 launches), the fact sheet's figures and the deck's "$10 BILLION"
• Architecture definition process, the workshops section: the 2023 "Lunar Site Selection" paper is held (question 92), the slides' rank, and a lead-in for the order of the paragraphs that follow
• open-questions.md: 6 gets a head marker: settled from the sources for all three phases; Phase 1's launches and the 37,500 kg reading still for the project lead
• queue.md: item 80 ticked for its synthesis part; three new items below it (lint; finished pages, part A, the topic pages; part B, gaps, data gaps and sources). index.md: the Overview line

Surprising:

• The overview had a false sentence. "What becomes of Gateway itself, none of the sources says" was written before the Ignition release was read; the release pauses Gateway "in its current form".
• The workshop slides change nothing in Rev C's lists by ID. What they add is history (Rev B's list, the first Mars decisions) and a few figures Rev C doesn't carry.

For the next session (the lint item): the overview's new section links anchors on the gaps index (#rev-bs-list-against-rev-c-february-2025-briefing), RT-1 (#partner-posters-february-2026), Phases (#capabilities-by-phase-in-ignition-deck-2, #figures-per-phase, #phase-names) and the deck 2 source page (#gateway-slides-23, #per-year-tables-slides-17-and-27, #mobility-slides-5559); check them with the rest. The text added this session carries no session numbers outside updated:; the index rows keep theirs as history. Some bullets in the overview's "What the workshop briefings add" and "Low Earth orbit" cite only the wiki topic page that holds the fact (Rev B's list, the integrated gaps, the first Mars decisions, the pre-formulation charts, the 36,000–40,000 kg lander, the LEO "alternate option"): the lint item should add the source page and slide from those topic pages.

Session 51 — 2026-10-01 — Lint, part 3: the project lead's decisions of 2026-10-01

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; open questions 16–20 and 73 in full, and the first line of every question to be marked
• the Users Guide text: p. 11 ("near-term Moon Base development efforts"; "Missions during phase one …"), the page markers, and every hyphenated word on pp. 12–14
• the data gaps CSV's header and DN-015 L row: column H is "Target Measurement Parameters" and DN-015 L is the 15th data row, so cell H16 matches the queue's reference. A CSV can't show formatting: that the cell has no superscript formatting comes from the queue item (the workbook was opened on 2026-10-01), not from this session's check
• searches of wiki/ for "for Moon Base Phase 1", "Phase 1 only", "MB =", "names it for", "Phase 1" (gap, data-gap, Moon Base, overview, elements and sub-architecture pages), and the five hyphenated words in any hyphen form

Updated:

• The label (question 73): "named in the Moon Base Users Guide (near-term)" replaces "named for Moon Base Phase 1" and "Phase 1 only" on index.md (the tech-gap legend, the data-gap line), the gaps index (opening, the #0504/#0505 note, the bin-table column, the sentence under it, the MB legend), the data gaps index, the Moon Base hub, Phases, Needs, by phase, Technology and knowledge challenges, the overview's summary, the Users Guide and data gaps spreadsheet source pages, Foundational Exploration, Sustained Lunar Evolution, the sub-architectures index and all twelve sub-architecture pages, plus #0605 and #0306. "Phase 1 functional gaps", their capability targets and the "Moon Base Phase 1" sections on the sub-architecture pages are about the functional gaps and stay
• Hyphens (question 17): three Users Guide p. 13 quotations still had the text layer's hyphens: #0605 ("in depth", "large scale"), #0306 ("crew rated"), Needs, by phase ("in depth", "large scale"). The p. 14 dust line quoted on #0802 is outside pp. 12–13 and stays; the "survive-the-night" quotations on other pages are from other sources and stay
• DN-015 L (question 20): the page, the data gaps index and the spreadsheet's source page now say the workbook stores "10-6 - 102 g" as plain text (cell H16, sheet "Rev C Data Gaps", no superscript formatting) and label 10⁻⁶ to 10² g the wiki's inference. The source page's "sheet titles are inferred" sentence now confirms "Rev C Data Gaps"; "Key" stays inferred
• open-questions.md: questions 2, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 26, 29, 34, 36, 38, 41, 44, 47, 50, 52, 55, 57, 59, 63, 67, 68, 70 and 73 marked "[Decided by the project lead, 2026-10-01: …]" with the SCHEMA.md section ("Moon Base lens" for 73; the Conventions sub-headings for the rest). 20 has no SCHEMA rule; its marker says where it was applied. Question 30 is not on the list and was left alone
• queue.md (ticked; a "Left from session 51" item for the gap and data-gap pages), index.md (the two legends, the DN-015 L and data-gaps source rows, a line on the "Decided by the project lead" markers)

Surprising:

• The Phase 1 label was in more places than question 73 listed. All 19 lunar data-gap pages and the 19 named gap pages said "The mapping is for Phase 1", and the other 38 gap pages said the guide "does not name it among the Moon Base Phase 1 challenges". They are in the item below.
• Only three hyphenated quotations were left. Earlier sessions had already moved most pages to the rendered form.

After this entry (the "Left from session 51" item, ticked):

• all 19 lunar data-gap pages and all 57 gap pages relabeled (#0605 and #0306 with the hyphen fixes, the other 55 here): the opening paragraph ("It is named in the Moon Base Users Guide (near-term), under …") and the "mapping is for Phase 1" line on the 19 named gaps, the "does not name it among its near-term Moon Base challenges" line on the 38 the guide doesn't name, and updated:. The replacement for "The mapping is for Phase 1" is one sentence on every page: The guide ties its challenges to "near-term Moon Base development efforts": missions in phase one "offer opportunities to collect data and mature technologies to enable essential phase two and phase three capabilities" (p. 11)
• a final search found more: the "Moon Base Phase 1" sections of ISRU, Data Systems and Infrastructure Support ("named for Phase 1"), FE's summary ("17 of the 19 … names for Phase 1"), the Phases page's "What it needs" bullet for Phase 1, which listed the challenges as Phase 1 needs, and, by a multiline search across line breaks, the tech gaps spreadsheet's source page ("behind Moon Base Phase 1 capabilities"). All fixed. The multiline search's other hits are about functional gaps or missions
• DN-015 L's new citation link shortened to the standard "Data gaps spreadsheet, DN-015 L"; the sheet and cell are in the sentence
• left as they are, by design: "Phase 1 functional gaps" and their capability targets, "Phase 1 missions on the same subject", the Ignition phase statements, and NASA's own "phase one" in quotations

For the next session (item 79, synthesis): a search of wiki/ (outside log, queue and open questions) for "for Moon Base Phase 1", "Phase 1 only", "named for Phase 1", "mapping is for Phase 1" and "Phase 1 challenge" now finds nothing. The session-number phrasing on the pages edited here ("checked in session 4", "(session 16)") was left for item 79's pass.

Session 50 — 2026-10-01 — Two linked pages: International Deep Space Standards and NextSTEP-2 Appendix R

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; open questions 10 and 30 in full
• both pages in sources/linked/ in full
• for checks: the Update's text on pp. 5, 9 and 15 (the white-paper citations; "NASA maintains a webpage …"); ADD Rev C p. 99 (the nine, "Two additional standards", footnote 35's internationaldeepspacestandards.com) and pp. 65, 100 (the standards' full names); RT-7, RT-2, the Industry Engagement, Supplemental Reading, Update, February 2025 Architecture Updates and February 2025 logistics-briefing source pages; the Lunar Utility Rover, Logistics Systems and Mobility Systems paragraphs on "Lunar Logistics and Mobility"; the gap titles in the 07 and 08 groups

Created (two source pages):

• International Deep Space Standards: the nine with revisions, descriptions and document hosts; against the Update, the ADD and the January 2026 slide
• NextSTEP-2 Appendix R: the "two gaps", three papers, goals, seven study areas, nine companies and their areas; against the February 2025 slides, the Update and Rev C

Updated:

• queue.md (ticked), index.md (a new "Pages the architecture documents link to" table with two rows)
• open-questions.md: 30 gets a bracketed status (standards part settled) and a session 50 addition (the standards page; Appendix R names the same three papers as the February 2025 briefing, so "Lunar Logistics and Mobility" is still unidentified; the question to the project lead restated); 10 a one-line note (neither page bears on it)
• after this entry was first written:
  • RT-7: a new "NASA's standards page" section (the nine with revisions and adoption as printed, kept apart; the wiki's comparison with the ADD and the Update; the "forward work" sentence left open), the Update's "NASA maintains a webpage …" sentence, a line under "Changes since Rev C"
  • RT-2: an "Appendix R, on its own page" bullet (two gaps, three papers, goals, nine companies, $24 million)
  • Lunar Utility Rover: "The need as NASA stated it in 2024", side by side with the Update's reason, labeled; Moon Base relevance unchanged
  • Logistics Systems and Mobility Systems: one or two sentences each on Appendix R
  • stale "not fetched" lines fixed on the Update, Industry Engagement, Supplemental Reading and February 2025 Architecture Updates source pages; index rows for RT-7, RT-2, the rover, Industry Engagement and Supplemental Reading
  • not done: gap pages (#0701, #0702, #0805, #0806, #0808); the study-area pairing stays on the Appendix R source page, as open question 88 is still waiting on a similar case; the Gateway page (it says nothing on standards)

Surprising:

• ADD Rev C itself cites the .com address (footnote 35, p. 99), which open question 30 had set against the Update's nasa.gov address. They are a list page and a document host.
• Adoption years aren't on NASA's own page except for Communications ("Adopted by the agency in 2024 through the Architecture Concept Review process"). Avionics, ECLSS, Rendezvous, Robotics and Thermal are 2019 baselines; the architecture adopted three of the "Moon to Mars" four only in 2025 (Update).
• Docking is the only standard with a 2025 revision: "G – August 2025", its document uploaded in January 2026.
• Appendix R calls logistics and uncrewed mobility "two gaps in its lunar architecture" (August 2024), a loose use of "gaps"; Rev C later added the Lunar Utility Rover for "autonomous lunar surface mobility". No source joins the two.
• Nine companies, $24 million, Special Aerospace Services in all seven areas; Moonprint, MDA Space and Pratt Miller in one each.

For the next session (item 78, Lint part 3): question 30 now has its standards part settled in the bracket at its head; mark it in the "Decided by the project lead" pass only if the project lead has decided the paper part. The two new source pages are linked from the index and the pages listed above; item 79's lint should still check them.

Session 49 — 2026-10-01 — February 2024 white-paper briefings: ISS lessons, logistics, in situ vs sample return, EVA drivers, site selection

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table; the Overview and Updates page's list of the 13 papers (slide 11); open questions 30 and 45; Key definition tasks (legacy decisions, MD-05)
• the text of all five files: ISS lessons (10 slides), lunar logistics (9), in situ vs sample return (7), surface EVA drivers (7), lunar site selection (5 pages); a search of all for "Moon Base", "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• images: ISS 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10; logistics 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9; in situ 7; EVA 2, 3, 4, 5, 7; site selection pp. 1 and 4. Not viewed: the title cards, whose text gives the whole title
• for checks: searches of all source texts for "90 days", "roughly half", "6–6.5", "11 seasonal", "382", "260+", "98%", OpNav, SEXTANT (each only in its own file); the data-gap titles

Created (five source pages and one concept page):

• ISS lessons: goals, six lesson areas, ECLSS diagram and figures, OpNav and SEXTANT, commercial facilities
• Lunar logistics: six categories, four drivers, the crew-and-days chart (approximate readings), the open-loop pie (matched to the paper's Figure 2 by thumbnail)
• In situ vs sample return
• Surface EVA drivers: ten considerations as captions; the paper's numbered sections from thumbnails
• Lunar Site Selection, 2023 paper: contents table, Figure 3, what changed since
• Lunar site selection: new concept page holding the paper's content, with "Where Rev C stands" (LD-03-L) and a labeled comparison

Updated:

• queue.md (ticked; a "Left from session 49" item below it for the stale claims and topic sections, done after this entry and ticked), index.md (five source rows, one concept row; the RT-8, Logistics, Utilization, Mobility and Human Lunar Return rows), open-questions.md (new 92: where the paper's content went; notes on 30 (the logistics deck doesn't settle it; one 2023 paper now held) and 45 (the paper says 2023))
• after the log entry: the Overview and Updates page's slide 11 section (one paper held, nine briefed in seven decks) and the White Papers page (the "Lunar Site Selection" row and summary); "In the February 2024 workshop briefing" sections on RT-8, Logistics Systems, Utilization Systems and Mobility Systems; pointers to Lunar site selection on Key definition tasks and Human Lunar Return
• after an advisor check: the same "none held" fix on the 2023 executive overview's and the 2024 mobility paper's source pages (reference 4 now held; the year oddity answered); Lunar site selection's two absence claims checked against Rev C's text (it mentions "landing site selection" under LD-04-L, p. 190, and non-polar sites, p. 30, but has no method section) and reworded

Surprising:

• Deck 15 is not a deck. The Workshops page's "White Paper Briefing: Lunar Site Selection" is the 2023 paper itself (five pages, ACR23 footers), the same size as the White Papers page's copy. The wiki now holds one of the thirteen 2023 papers, which makes "None of the 13 is among the wiki's sources" (Overview and Updates page) and the White Papers page's "not held" row stale; fixing them is the next item.
• The HLS "viable to conduct a lunar landing for about 90 days" in NRHO, and SLS Block 1 reaching lunar orbit for "roughly half" of each lunar month: mission-availability limits in no other source the wiki holds (searched).
• The logistics pie: water 29%, EVA consumables and spares 21%, food 14%; water and gases 45% of the mass for an open-loop mission.
• The paper's own sidebar says 2023, so the 2024 mobility paper's "2022" (open question 45) is its slip.

For the next session (item 76, the standards and NextSTEP Appendix R pages in sources/linked/): open question 30 now has notes from sessions 42, 46 and 49; Appendix R is a solicitation for studies, not a paper, in every source so far. The workshop slides are all read; the synthesis item (78) should say on overview.md and the workshops section that one 2023 paper, "Lunar Site Selection", is held (open question 92).

Session 48 — 2026-10-01 — February 2024 breakouts and Mars white-paper briefings

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table, open questions 54 and 89–90
• the text of all six decks: Foundational Exploration breakout (7 slides), technology and infrastructure breakout (9), Mars science and architecture breakout (6), human health and performance (10), Mars decisions (15), Mars challenges (10); a search of all for "Moon Base", "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• images: every text-poor slide except the title cards (FE 3–7; T&I 3, 7, 8; Mars science 6; health 2, 3, 4, 5, 10; decisions 3, 5, 6, 15; challenges 3, 7), plus T&I 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, Mars science 3, health 6, decisions 4, 7, 9, 13, challenges 2, 5, 9, 10; the panel deck's slide 12, to compare with T&I slide 3 (the same)
• for checks: the panel and overview source pages, Key definition tasks (MD-02, MD-05, the February 2024 section), the EDL paper's Figure 5, the February 2025 crew briefing, #0103, the lunar objectives and the 2023 variants, the ADD on LSIC (pp. 86, 99) and MD-02 (p. 193); searches of all source texts for "LIFT-1", "Advanced Power Capability", "on-ramp" and "LSIC"

Created (six source pages):

• FE breakout: six priorities, infrastructure, nine "technical advancements", a surface WiFi/UHF/EVA range map
• Technology and infrastructure breakout: slides 2, 3, 9 are the panel's 11–13; LIFT-1, LSIC, power investments, nuclear propulsion
• Mars science breakout: drivers, the Tiger Team themes, considerations, questions, three Mars science objectives, six CHP objectives
• Human health and performance: five hazards, 32 risks, cross-interactions, four lists of requirements; the paper's figure from a thumbnail
• Mars decisions: the seven, one slide each; "nearly 100"; the studies timeline; the paper's title from a thumbnail
• Mars challenges: distances, trajectories, landers, ascent, aborts, gear ratios; the three papers' first pages from thumbnails

Updated:

• queue.md (ticked; a "Left from session 48" item below it, done after this entry and ticked), index.md (six source rows; the Key definition tasks, Overview deck, Human Systems, Transportation Systems and Foundational Exploration rows)
• open-questions.md: new 91 (the human-class lander's landed mass, 36–40 t on the slide against 26–36 t in the 2024 EDL paper); a note on 54 (crew to surface and to vicinity were two decisions; the slides run in MD order; still no printed numbers)
• Key definition tasks: the "nearly 90 … nearly 100" sentence corrected (both figures at the February 2024 workshop); the seven decisions as briefed, with a labeled comparison against Rev C
• Overview and Updates source page: the same correction; "eight are briefed" corrected to ten papers in eight decks, three not briefed by title
• Human Systems, Transportation Systems and Foundational Exploration: "In the February 2024 workshop briefing" sections (hazards and requirements; the lander table and question 91; the six priorities and nine advancements)
• not done: #0103 and #0601 (the UHF 1.0 km and LIFT-1 pairings stay on the source pages), Power Systems (STMD's five power technologies), Why Moon to Mars (the distance table), the Humans to Mars hub (pointers to the Mars decisions, challenges and science decks)
• after an advisor check: the 90/100 wording on four pages now says only that both figures appear at one workshop and the decks don't relate them; the "Services" claim checked by search (only "Gateway Logistics Services" in Rev C)

Surprising:

• "Nearly 90" and "nearly 100" at one workshop. The opening deck says NASA "catalogued nearly 90 needed decisions"; the Mars decisions deck says "Preliminary analysis identified nearly 100 key architecture decisions". Key definition tasks read the two as growth from 2024 to 2025; corrected.
• The target state as first framed: "Science missions to different sites, excursions from an established base at one site, or something else?" Rev C's down-select kept three multi-mission options.
• Crew to surface and crew to vicinity were two decisions from the start, each with its own slide, which bears on open question 54.
• The lander table differs from the paper it announces ("Upcoming ACR24 White Paper"): 36–40 t landed, not 26–36 t.
• Slide 7's abort odometer doesn't add up: "934,818 million" km beside "8.28 AU".
• 32 human system risks, "Inflight Medial Conditions" among them; the February 2025 crew briefing's "Integrated Human Performance" figure appears to be this 2023 paper's Figure 1 (read from a thumbnail).

For the next session (item 74, the rest of the February 2024 white-paper briefings): the overview deck's slide 11 lists the 13 papers; 2024-02-12 lunar logistics bears on open question 30 (the "Lunar Logistics Drivers and Needs" title). The Mars challenges and health decks' last slides carry thumbnails of the papers' pages; read them as thumbnails, not as the papers.

Session 47 — 2026-10-01 — February 2024 program briefings

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table
• the text of all four decks: Overview and Updates (14 slides), Program Office updates (18), Mission Directorate Panel (18), element initiation breakout (8); a search of all for "Moon Base", "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• images: overview 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13; program office 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 16; panel 5, 6, 7, 12, 15; breakout 2, 5, 6. Not viewed: the title cards whose text gives the whole title (panel 1, 10, 14; breakout 1)
• for checks: the 2023 overview's source page and text ("ingress", "reference mission"), the February 2025 Architecture Updates and Program Office source pages, the 2024 partnerships paper's Figure 2, Key definition tasks, Elements, Gateway, RT-1, the White Papers page, Lunar objectives (LI wording), the FE gaps deck's SMD studies; searches of all source texts for "DPMC", "DLEU", "LEGS", "Block 2B", "BOX 22", the HLS uncrewed milestones (across line breaks)

Created (four source pages):

• Overview and Updates: Rev A's decomposition pie charts transcribed, with the wiki's sums; the seven new elements with the UAE note; the 13 papers with their keys; the seven decisions; the process figure; SAC24 forward work
• Program Office updates: the office and its org chart; the UC-001-L flow-down table; Artemis I–V with a line-by-line comparison against February 2025; the Artemis III milestones
• Mission Directorate Panel: four directorates' slides; STMD's LI checks; SCaN's networks and studies
• Element initiation breakout: element initiation's purpose; the two charts against the 2024 paper's Figure 2; who leads when; OIIR contacts

Updated:

• queue.md (ticked), index.md (four source rows; a February 2024 clause on the Gateway, HLS, SCaN, Elements, Objective decomposition, Key definition tasks, RT-1 and Human Lunar Return rows)
• Gateway: "In the February 2024 workshop briefing" (the UAE airlock note; reading the two airlock hexagons as one module is labeled the wiki's)
• Elements: "In the February 2024 workshop briefings" (seven elements, element initiation's purpose, who leads when), with a labeled comparison against Section 3.4
• Human Lunar Return and Human Landing System: February 2024 sections (providers named on Artemis III; the HLS uncrewed milestones)
• SCaN Networks: February 2024 section (DLEU, LCRNS, LEGS; the "10-m" need paired with #0101 and 3GPP with #0103, labeled)
• Objective decomposition: Rev A's counts and the UC-001-L flow-down
• Science objectives and the decadal surveys: SMD's "1:1 trace"
• Key definition tasks: the seven hexagons of February 2024, "nearly 90"
• RT-1: the earliest two charts and the UAE airlock's order of events
• Architecture definition process: a February 2024 paragraph in the workshops section (ACR23 products, SAC24 tasks, the 2022 feedback); "A year earlier" became "A year later" for February 2025, which now follows it
• not done: gap pages #0101 and #0103 (the SCaN pairings sit on the SCaN page and the panel's source page only); the STMD LI checks on Lunar objectives (source page only)
• open-questions.md: new 90 (six or seven 2023 elements; the wiki reads the two airlock hexagons as one module)

Surprising:

• Seven hexagons for six elements. The overview slide shows the 2023 overview's six plus a dashed seventh, the airlock again as the UAE's "Crew and Science Airlock Module", with "Implementing Arrangement was signed shortly after ACR23 … will be included in ADD Rev-B". The wiki reads the two airlock hexagons as one module (open question 90). The only source that dates the step from agreement to ADD, as the 2024 paper describes it.
• Rev A's lunar decomposition was bigger. By the pie slices, 231 characteristics and needs, 167 use cases and 251 functions in Rev A; 133, 162 and 206 in the 2024 tables.
• A requirements flow-down. The only source that shows the step below the ADD: UC-001-L's seven functions to "ACD-50007 ConOps Capabilities" to 25 CESD-R and ACD-R requirements. None of the three document families is expanded.
• "Nearly 90" decisions in 2024, "nearly 100" candidate tasks in the 2025 paper.
• STMD's checks skip LI-9 (environmental monitoring and early warning).

For the next session (item 73, February 2024 breakouts and Mars white-paper briefings): these decks brief 2023 papers the wiki doesn't hold; say so. The overview deck's slide 11 gives the 13 titles with keys; "Mars Priority Decisions" is the paper the queue calls "Mars decisions" (2024-02-09). Compare the Mars decisions briefing with the seven hexagons (overview slide 12) and Key definition tasks.

Session 46 — 2026-10-01 — February 2025 white-paper briefings

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table, open question 30
• the text of all eleven decks: technology gaps (industry 6 slides, partners 6), "Human Exploration Enables Science" (10, 10), lunar logistics, mobility and cargo (8, 8), Mars surface power (13, 13), Mars crew complement (7, 7), Mars EDL (partners only, 8); a search of all for "Moon Base", "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• images: technology gaps slides 4 and 5 and the partners' slide 4 (its text layer is garbled); logistics 3, 4, 6, 7; power 4, 9 (both decks), 11; crew 3, 4, 5; science 2, 7, 8, 9; EDL 5. Not viewed: the title slides and power slide 13 (their text gives title, presenter, and the decision with its link); each source page says so
• for checks: the source pages of the six 2024 papers briefed, and searches of the papers' own texts for what the slides add ("1,600", "mission concept review", "17 functions", "DRA", "HALEU", "Pu-238", "Isolation"); the 2024 tech-gaps paper's Table 1 order; the December 2025 sheet's titles for eight gaps; MD-05's wording; the Update's radar-chart labels

Created (eleven source pages; each copy is a short page of what differs):

• technology gaps and copy: Rev B's whole ranked list (slide 5), transcribed with bins; #0301's Rev B table; who supplies each field; eight Rev B titles that differ from the sheet
• logistics, mobility and cargo and copy: Rev A's 17 cargo functions, the mission concept reviews, the LTV's 1,600 kg, distances, the slide 7 chart and map, the Argonaut caption
• Mars surface power and copy: attributes, options, masses, dust, scalability charts, affordability, the MOE scoring
• Mars crew complement and copy: the five hazard groups, prompts
• Mars EDL: the paper only
• "Human Exploration Enables Science" and copy: the reports, the Artemis III science team, prompts

Updated:

• Gaps index: a section "Rev B's list against Rev C (February 2025 briefing)", the wiki's comparison (bins, movers, unchanged, ties, in and out); two stale claims corrected ("Rev B's list itself isn't among the sources", "Rev B's ratings aren't known")
• 2024 tech-gaps paper's source page: the "isn't known" sentence on Table 1's order corrected
• #0301: a section "In the February 2025 workshop briefing" (open question 89)
• Key definition tasks: "In the February 2025 workshop briefing" under the MD-07 case study
• open-questions.md: a note on question 30 (not settled), new 89 (the #0301 section; the Argonaut caption, the LTV's 1,600 kg and "MPH" recorded, not joined)
• queue.md (ticked), index.md (eleven source rows in six lines; the gaps index, Key definition tasks and #0301 rows)
• Lunar Terrain Vehicle: the briefing's "800 kg (full performance)" and "1600 kg (reduced performance)", in its February 2025 section, not joined to the paper's 1,500 kg
• not done: Mobility Systems (the 1,600 kg figure, the Rev B mobility function count) and Lunar Surface Cargo Lander (the caption); they are on the source page only

Surprising:

• The full Rev B list was public all along, in a workshop deck: 56 gaps, ranks and bins. The 2024 paper's unnumbered Table 1 is its top five in rank order. Rev B to Rev C: #1107 Cryogenic Fluid Transfer 11 to 4, #1106 Cryogenic Fluid Storage 43 to 32, #1101 29 to 27; no gap fell a bin.
• #0301's target was "150 (TBR) hours" in Rev B, 350 in Rev C. The logistics deck's shadow chart draws an "Uncrewed terrain shadow duration requirement" line at about 150 hours.
• The logistics briefing doesn't settle question 30: its own title is "Lunar Logistics, Mobility, and Cargo", and it lists three papers under their own titles.
• The MD-07 scoring marks fission down on cost only, and says no baseline Mars MOE assessment existed yet.

For the next session (February 2024 program briefings, item 72): session 44's note holds (compare the February 2024 Program Office deck's Artemis IV lines with the 2025 deck's). Gap pages other than #0301 get no Rev B rank lines; the comparison's home is the gaps index (open question 89). The synthesis item (77) could carry the LTV's "1600 kg (reduced performance)" to Mobility Systems as a labeled February 2025 line.

Session 45 — 2026-10-01 — February 2025: Paths to Partnership, International Partnerships, panels and roundtables

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table
• the text of all four decks: Paths to Partnership (industry and academia, 22 slides), International Partnerships (international, 16), panels and roundtables (industry and academia, 13; international, 6); a search of all for "Moon Base", "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• images: every text-poor slide (Paths 1, 3, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, 19; Partnerships 1, 2, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13; panels international 3), plus Paths 2, 14, 20, 21, 22, Partnerships 8, the industry panels' slide 1 and the international panels' slide 4
• for checks: RT-1 and RT-2 in full, the Architecture 101 pages (pre-formulation), the CLPS page's sections; a search of all source texts for "affirmation" and "Infusion into Artemis" (only the Paths deck)

Created (four source pages):

• Paths to Partnership: slide table; the chart under its new title, with the added "Agency affirmation of the element in Artemis"; procurement routes; HRP and TRISH; STMD's future structure (transcribed, 23 capability areas by the wiki's count, compared with nothing) and mechanisms; SMD's CLPS figures and ROSES elements; the Mars Campaign Office's cycle and priority areas; what changed by Rev C; oddities
• International Partnerships: OIIR's guidelines and models; the chart without the added sentence; the human system slide; ISLSWG; partner routes for science
• panels, industry and academia and panels, international: the sessions as tables

Updated:

• queue.md (ticked; no follow-on item: the gap-page pointer lines wait on open question 88), index.md (three source rows, plus lines on the RT-1 and gaps index rows)
• RT-1: the sentence that gave both February 2025 workshops the title "Partner Pre-formulation Process" corrected (the industry deck's title differs); a section "In the February 2025 workshop briefings" (OIIR's guidelines and models, ISLSWG, partner routes for science) with a labeled "What changed by Rev C"
• RT-2: a February 2025 section (the five offices' routes in)
• Gaps index: "The Mars Campaign Office's priority areas (February 2025)", with the areas matched to nine gaps by title, labeled the wiki's
• CLPS: "In the February 2025 workshop briefings", with a labeled comparison against Rev C's counts
• Pressurized Rover: SMD's "Uncrewed Science with Pressurized Rover (April)"
• Architecture definition process: the February 2025 programmes and the Mars Campaign Office's tie to the annual cycle
• open-questions.md: new 88 (keep the title matches or not), with notes on the TechPort address (question 36) and on question 30
• not done: Human Systems (HRP, TRISH and the ISLSWG are on the source pages only)

Surprising:

• The chart has a third title and a new sentence for industry. "Partner Path to Infusion into Artemis Enterprise", with "Agency affirmation of the element in Artemis." opening the acquisition strategy caption; the partners' copy at the same workshops has neither.
• The Mars Campaign Office runs its portfolio off the ADD. Its cycle starts when "SAO holds Architecture Concept Review and releases annual Architecture Definition Document revision" and reports progress "for ESDMD architecture gap updates"; its priority list ends "Other ADD technology gaps will be considered". The only source so far that describes progress flowing back into the gaps. Matching its areas to gaps by title is open question 88.
• OIIR: "activities need not be equivalent in terms of financial value", and partnerships "generally do not involve joint development of technology".
• No key for the partner-interest dots. The partnerships deck doesn't explain them; its slide 10 invites agencies to "Find areas where your agency would like to collaborate or contribute", without dots.

For the next session (the February 2025 white-paper briefings, item 71): don't add the Mars Campaign Office lines to gap pages; they wait on open question 88. Both workshops held a "Logistics and Mobility" session (title cards only); the logistics briefing may be the Workshops page's 2025 "Lunar Mobility and Logistics" item (open question 30). For item 73: Partnerships slide 10 shows the first page of the 2023 white paper "Human Health and Performance", which the wiki doesn't hold.

Session 44 — 2026-10-01 — Left from session 43: the February 2025 Program Office deck on element pages

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• the Program Office deck's text (all 16 slides) and its source page, the international copy's source page (the slides used here differ only in where one science line sits); slide 13's image, to check the captions
• the four element pages in full, Initial Surface Habitat (for the section's form), Power Systems, the Foundational Exploration segment's February 2025 section and the FE gaps source page's worked example
• for checks: a search of all source texts for "Sustaining" (the name "Sustaining Starship HLS" is also in the February 2024 Program Office deck, queued; not in Rev C), ADD Rev C p. 63 for "instrument" (none), and Rev C for Artemis III–V, Starship, Blue Moon, I-Hab and HALO (it names Artemis III only generically and assigns no lander provider or Gateway component to any mission, which the new comparisons say)

Updated (no pages created):

• Gateway, Human Landing System, Lunar Terrain Vehicle, Pressurized Rover: a short section "In the February 2025 workshop briefing" each, with a comparison against Rev C labeled as the wiki's. On Gateway and HLS it sits before Functions (as on Initial Surface Habitat); on the two rovers, after the executive overviews, beside their other older-source sections. Moon Base relevance and "Changes since Rev C" untouched
• Power Systems: a pointer section to the power-sharing example, whose home stays on Foundational Exploration
• queue.md (ticked), index.md (the five rows)

Surprising:

• The refueling module under two names, one slide apart: "ESPRIT Refueling Module" on the Artemis V slide, "ESA Lunar View Refueling Module" in the next slide's caption. Rev C's "previously known as" (p. 53) joins them.
• The deck's Gateway module names are not Rev C's: "International Habitat" (Rev C's Lunar I-Hab) and "Deep Space Logistics" (Rev C's Gateway Logistics Element, whose deliveries Rev C calls "Deep Space Logistics services"). The matches are the wiki's.
• The Pressurized Rover "will also host multiple science instruments" (slide 14); Rev C's one-pager speaks only of "science tools".

For the next session (February 2025: Paths to Partnership, International Partnerships, panels and roundtables): session 43's note still holds: the international partnerships deck may explain the "Expressed Partner Interest" dots on the FE gaps decks. The February 2024 Program Office deck (item 72) has at least some of the same Artemis IV lines ("SpaceX Sustaining Starship HLS", then "Gateway modules: Power and Propulsion Element and Habitation and …", per a text search): compare it with the 2025 deck and record what differs.

Session 43 — 2026-10-01 — February 2025: Foundational Exploration gaps and Program Office updates

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table, open questions 48, 65 and 85–86
• the text of all four decks: the Foundational Exploration gaps primary (industry and academia, 15 slides) and its copy (international, 11), the Program Office updates primary (industry and academia, 16) and its copy (international, 16); a search of all four for "Moon Base", "CUI", "Pre-Decisional" and "export" (none)
• images: FE gaps slides 1–6, 8, 11, 12, 15, and the copy's 4, 5, 11; Program Office slides 1–4, 13–16, and the copy's 7
• for checks: the session 42 source pages (format), the Workshops page, Lunar function allocation (B.5, the 2024 against 2025 counts), the fission element's functions, the FE and HLR segment pages, RT-8, the gaps index's shortfall paragraph, Phase 1 functional gaps; a search of all sources for "integrated gap" and the gap names (only these decks)

Created (four source pages):

• Foundational Exploration gaps, industry and academia deck: slide table; the two-way gap definition with its chart and examples, set against B.5 and the 2024 table; the power-sharing example, with its functions against the fission element's (the wiki's comparison); the 11 high-priority and 16 secondary integrated gaps transcribed from the images, with the international deck's partner-interest dots as a column; SMD's gaps and studies; STMD's ranking, lessons and top 30; the LEO strategy's goals; what changed by Rev C; oddities
• its international copy: what differs (the dots, no STMD talk, another SMD presenter)
• Program Office updates, industry and academia deck: slide table; Artemis II to V as planned, in one table; what changed since (the wiki's comparison); international collaboration; oddities
• its international copy: what differs, including the 19 February 2025 caption

Updated:

• open-questions.md: new 87 (pair STMD's shortfalls with the technology gaps or not); additions on 48 (a fourth meaning of "architecture gap", slide 2's two ways) and 65 (slide 2 calls two B.5 functions performance gaps)
• queue.md (ticked; element one-liners added as a "Left from session 43" item), index.md (two source rows)
• Foundational Exploration: a section "In the February 2025 workshop briefing" (the integrated gaps, the partner dots, the power example; set against the ten areas of future work and the fission element's functions, labeled the wiki's)
• Gaps index: "The wiki holds no shortfall list" corrected; the 2024 ranking as briefed, with a pointer to the top 30 and question 87
• Phase 1 functional gaps: one paragraph on slide 2's examples (Moon Base relevance unchanged; the deck predates the Moon Base)
• RT-1: slide 2's definition in the "architecture gaps" section
• RT-8: a February 2025 section, the LEO Microgravity Strategy's three goals
• Utilization Systems: a February 2025 section, SMD's six gaps for science, five studies, and the Utilization integrated gaps
• Human Lunar Return: a February 2025 section, Artemis I–V as then planned

Surprising:

• A third kind of gap list. "Integrated gaps" for Foundational Exploration (11 high-priority, 16 secondary), named by capability and place, sized in "major elements", ranked by "significance of closure to objective satisfaction". Rev C has nothing like it; its nearest is the segment's ten areas of future work.
• The "performance gap" examples are unallocated functions. Slide 2 calls FN-H-102 L and FN-X-103 L (month-plus habitation and countermeasures) performance gaps, yet both are in B.5 and were "Unallocated" in 2024 too. The guide-style split "unallocated or needs more performance" doesn't follow the unallocated list.
• Power sharing, ten months before the fission element. The example's ">10 kW" and "2-4 ton relocatable systems" come with seven functions, three of which Rev C gave to the new Lunar Nuclear Fission System.
• STMD's #1 shortfall is the lunar night, and many top-30 titles echo technology-gap titles; no source maps them (question 87).
• Partner interest on the integrated gaps: most dots on high-capacity mobility at the South Pole (seven).

For the next session (February 2025: Paths to Partnership, International Partnerships, panels and roundtables): the international partnerships deck may explain the "Expressed Partner Interest" dots; if it does, add it to the FE gaps source pages. The Workshops page gives no dates for the February 2025 workshops.

Session 42 — 2026-10-01 — February 2025 architecture briefings: Architecture Updates and Architecture 101

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table, open questions 30, 84 and 85
• the text of all four decks: the Architecture Updates primary (international, 19 slides) and its copy (industry and academia, 17), the Architecture 101 primary (industry and academia, 19) and its copy (international, 19); a search of all four for "Moon Base", "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• images: Updates slides 1, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, and the copy's 14, 15, 16; Architecture 101 slides 1, 9, 10, 11, 13–17, 19, and the copy's 1, 13 and 17
• for checks: the 2024 overview's source page, Initial Surface Habitat, Lunar Surface Cargo Lander, RT-1's pre-formulation and "architecture gaps" sections, Objective decomposition (the five principles), the Objectives index ("26 objectives"), the White Papers page, Lunar functions (FN-U-201 L, FN-U-204 L), Key definition tasks (LD-06-L), ADD Rev C pp. 3–4 (revision notes) and its appendix list; a search of all sources for "2 tons" and "up to 4" (only these decks), and of all 2024–2025 decks for a cargo-lander mass near "cargo lander" and for a habitat crew size (none for either element)

Created (four source pages):

• Architecture Updates, international deck: slide table; the process figure; the 2024 workshops' feedback; ACR24 and Rev B (50+ pages, definitions, decomposition updates); the two new elements; Rev B's appendices by letter against Rev C's (the wiki's matching); the 2024 white papers under the slide's titles; NextSTEP-2 Appendix R with its dates; what changed by Rev C; oddities
• its industry and academia copy: what differs
• Architecture 101, industry and academia deck: slide table; the elements on a notional timeline; the pre-formulation chart and the redrawn coffee maker; SMD's science slides; discussion prompts; the 31 white papers by focus
• its international copy: what differs

Updated:

• Initial Surface Habitat and Lunar Surface Cargo Lander: a section "In the February 2025 workshop briefing" each. Moon Base relevance unchanged on both (the decks predate the Moon Base); the cargo lander's side-by-side with the guide's two-ton target sits in the new section, not tied (question 86)
• RT-1: one paragraph on the February 2025 pre-formulation chart (industry lane as in 2024), the redrawn coffee maker and the partner dots; the "architecture gaps" section gets slide 14's use of the phrase for technology gaps
• RT-2: Appendix R as briefed, with its study areas and dates
• Key definition tasks: the "Priority Decisions" chart shown again in February 2025 (slide 16)
• Architecture definition process: "A year earlier, February 2025" in the workshops section (registrants, the 2024 feedback, what changed); the 31 white papers on the shelf paragraph; "Rev B by its briefing" (50+ pages, appendix letters)
• open-questions.md: new 86 (the habitat's four against Rev C's two; whether the lander's 2 tons may be joined to the guide's two-ton Phase 1 target); additions on 30 (Appendix R briefed as a solicitation, the paper still unidentified) and 48 (a third meaning of "architecture gaps")
• queue.md, index.md (two source rows; the two element rows)

Surprising:

• The only capacity any source gives the Lunar Surface Cargo Lander: "payload capacity on the order of 2 tons" (slide 13), the same order as the Users Guide's Phase 1 target of landers with "two metric ton cargo delivery capability". Rev C dropped the figure. Not joined (question 86).
• "Up to 4 surface crew" for the Initial Surface Habitat (slide 12), where Rev C says two.
• Rev B's appendices had other letters: B decisions, C technology gaps, D definitions. "Appendix C" in material that cites Rev B (December 2024 to late 2025) means the gap list, not Rev C's Appendix C.
• "Architecture gaps are… capability areas … technologies that need to be matured or invented" (slide 14): here the phrase means the technology gaps, not the 2024 partnerships paper's unallocated use cases and functions (question 48).
• NextSTEP-2 Appendix R had a source selection on 22 January 2025, a month before the workshops; no selections named.

For the next session (February 2025: Foundational Exploration gaps and Program Office updates): the primary decks are the industry and academia ones; the international copies are 71% and 90% of them. Slides 4–16 of the Updates deck repeat the 2024 overview; don't re-record them on topic pages. For the white-paper briefings item: the international logistics briefing (2025-02-iparch10-wp-logistics-mobility-cargo, slide 4) has a "Lunar Surface Cargo Capacity Estimates" table with "ESA Argonaut Lander, Up to 2.1 t" and a JAXA cargo lander "Under study", and no row for the Lunar Surface Cargo Lander; keep it apart from question 86.

Session 41 — 2026-10-01 — 2026 international workshop deck and the eight partner posters

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, the screening table, open questions 28, 80 and 84
• the deck's text for all 48 slides, compared with the January deck's source page; searches of the deck and posters for "Moon Base", "CUI", "Pre-Decisional" and "export" (none)
• the deck's images for the slides that differ (1, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 35, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48), plus 26, 27 and 31 to check them against January (the other text-poor slides have January's titles and text, so they were compared by text only)
• all eight posters' text, and their images: ESA's (with its four tiles) and GISTDA's, which have almost no text layer, plus ASA's, ASI's, CNES's and KASA's to place labels the text layer scatters
• for checks: the Architecture Workshops page (poster lines), the manifest rows, the ACR24 International Partnerships page (Figure 2's transcription), RT-1, Missions and assets ("MPH"), the objectives counts

Created (nine source pages):

• 2026 international partners workshop deck: a slide map against the January deck, what was cut and added, slide 21's Rev B page, slide 25's pre-formulation chart against the 2024 Figure 2, the new photo and fireside slides
• posters: ASA, ASI, CNES, ESA, GISTDA, KASA, LSA, UKSA, each attributed to its agency, with the wiki's comparison against ADD Rev C's RT-1 list

Updated:

• open-questions.md: new 85 (pair partner-poster capabilities with gaps or not); additions on 28 (both wordings shown in Rome too), 80 (no CUI line) and 84 (the caveat repeated)
• queue.md (ticked; the topic-page updates were added as a "Left from session 41" item for safety, then done in this session and ticked), index.md (the deck row and a poster row)
• RT-1, "Changes since Rev C": slide 25's pre-formulation chart against the 2024 Figure 2 (the wiki's comparison), and a new subsection "Partner posters, February 2026" (a table of the eight, and the overlap with the ADD's nine joint-study agencies)
• Missions and assets, Phase Three: ASI's poster's "Multipurpose Habitation Module (MPH)"; deck 2's "MPH" stays the wiki's match. Initial Surface Habitat: one sentence on the MPH (still not matched), and the "Foundational Surface Habitat" line now cites February slide 48
• Key definition tasks, Data gaps index, Architecture definition process: one line or paragraph each on the Rome deck
• "March 2026 international deck" corrected to the February date on the January deck's page, Key definition tasks and Initial Surface Habitat; the January page's "for its own queue item" pointer replaced by a link. Old log entries and dated open-question notes were left as written

Surprising:

• The "March" deck is a February deck. Every slide is dated "February 24-25, 2026"; only the upload path says March. The content pages that called it "the March international deck" are corrected.
• A glimpse of Rev B. Slide 21 sets an ADD Rev B page (Orion, §3.1.4.8.2, p. 96, "ESDMD-001 Rev-B MD-01") beside Rev C's one-pager. Revs A and B are not among the sources, so this is the only view of one.
• NASA re-showed its 2024 pre-formulation chart to partners, retitled "Pre-Formulation Process for Architecture Elements", with "Partner Pre-Phase A" in the industry lane where 2024 had "Industry BAA, RFI, etc.".
• ASI's own expansion of MPH: "Multipurpose Habitation Module", a month before the Ignition release called ASI's Phase Three contribution "Multi-purpose Habitats (MPH)".
• ASA maps its rover to NASA's objective codes, tenets included, without suffixes: a partner doing the traceability itself.

Not changed: RT-7 (the Rome deck drops January's standards slide, so its citations stand); the gap pages (partner capabilities not paired, open question 85); Orion (slide 21's Rev B page is on the source page only); Moon Base relevance everywhere (no source in this item says "Moon Base").

For the next session (February 2025 architecture briefings): the 2026 workshop material is now all read. The index's RT-1 row names the posters; the Missions and assets and Initial Surface Habitat rows were not lengthened for the one MPH sentence each.

Session 40 — 2026-10-01 — 2026 industry and academia workshop deck, slides 26–50

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 28 and 82–83, the screening table
• the deck's text for slides 26–50, and a search of the whole text layer for "Moon Base" (none)
• the images of all nine text-poor slides in 26–50 (26, 27, 30, 37, 38, 39, 46, 49, 50), plus slides 28, 29, 31–36, 42, 43 and 47 to read charts or check the text
• for checks: Key definition tasks (MD-02, MD-04, MD-05), Humans to Mars, the data gaps index, the data-gaps white paper's source page (Figure One, Table Two), Architecture definition process (Figure Four), the data-gap page titles, open questions 28, 31 and 38; searches of all sources for "Blueprint", "Mobile Expedition", "minimum to be up to six", "Sufficient data exist" and "new or improved" (only this deck, the March international deck and, for "Blueprint", the queued 2024–2025 decks), and of the December 2025 documents for "sufficient data" or "initial Artemis missions" (only an unrelated line in the Update)

Updated:

• The deck's source page: finished. Slide rows 26–50 and four sections: implementation challenges (slide 28's Moon–Mars chart, slide 29's operations chart over the project life cycle), the MD-05 briefing (slides 30–37), data gaps (39–48), sample return (slide 50's chart of "Unknowns", paired with #1201 as the wiki's). Comparison and oddities extended; "No Moon Base" now covers the whole deck
• Key definition tasks: MD-05 now tables the workshop's two wordings (slide 15, the ADD's; slide 31, "the minimum to be up to six (6)") and adds "The reasoning as briefed in January 2026" (slides 32–35: findings, the crew-number chart, even crew, caution on automation/AI); MD-02 gets slide 36's "more than one crew landing"; MD-04 gets slide 36's "MARS LOSS OF CREW RISK POSTURE" (the match to MD-04 labeled the wiki's). The "Changes since Rev C" intro, which said no newer source mentions a definition task, corrected
• Humans to Mars: the "As the wiki reads it" line on MD-02 now cites slide 36; the crew bullet names the third wording
• Data gaps index: a new section, "Briefed at the January 2026 workshop" (slides 40–47): the same list; DN-016 L's data type as the ADD's; slide 41's "Sufficient data exist to enable initial Artemis Missions in Human Lunar Return (HLR)" set beside the 17 HLR gaps; slide 43's definition with "new or improved data" and "utilization", against the white paper's Figure One and the ADD (labeled the wiki's comparison, not called a conflict); purpose, impacts, "Blueprint" unexpanded. A line on the counts paragraph for slide 47
• Architecture definition process: one line on Figure Four, shown again as "Architecture Maturation Strategy" (slide 37)
• #1201: a Related-pages bullet for slide 50's sample-handling chart, labeled the wiki's pairing; Moon Base relevance unchanged
• open-questions.md: notes on 28 (the third wording, posed to the project lead, not read as reconciling), 31 (the crew briefing's "4-24 Minutes") and 38 (slide 47 follows the ADD on DN-016 L; counts still follow the sheet); new 84: "sufficient data" for initial HLR missions against 17 gaps whose segment is HLR
• queue.md, index.md (the source row, Key definition tasks, Humans to Mars, Data gaps index, Architecture definition process)
• Checks after review: the "Changes since Rev C" intro no longer says the January deck is the only newer source on definition tasks (the March deck carries the same lines); the "new against the December documents" sentence narrowed (the 1-crew and 7+ bands echo the Update and the ADD); slide 50's circles described correctly; slide 41 also noted under the segment table. A search of content pages for stale "slides 1–25" or "not yet recorded" pointers found none

Not changed: Mars-forward (slide 28's Moon–Mars chart never says "Moon Base"; kept on the source page, with a pointer to the guide's list, unmatched); Gateway (slide 27 is a rendering with a caption only); the data-gap pages (slide 42's utility statements are Table Two's word for word, already on DN-002, -007, -008 and -017 L); Initial Surface Habitat (slide 28's "SURFACE HABITAT" is a picture label, not matched); RT-4 and Human Systems (slide 35's points are on Key definition tasks only, their home).

Surprising:

• A third wording of the Mars crew decision, from the people who briefed it. Slide 31 says "consideration for the minimum to be up to six (6) crew" and that this is "Documented in Revision C", sixteen slides after the same deck printed the ADD's "no fewer than six (6)". Question 28 now has three NASA wordings.
• The reasoning has numbers the documents don't. The crew chart's bands (1 cannot, 2–3 feasible but not recommended, 3 the minimum for coverage, 4–6 balanced, 7+ feasibility challenges), "Even number of crew preferrable", and a caution on relying on automation/AI to shrink crews.
• "More than one crew landing" is now NASA's own words for the Mars target state, where the wiki had only its own reading of Appendix C.
• "Sufficient data exist" for initial HLR missions, while 17 data gaps are listed as needed in HLR (question 84).

For the next session (2026 international workshop deck and the eight partner posters): the March deck is an 80% near-copy of this one. Compare text and look only at the images of slides that differ; it carries slide 31's third wording and slide 41's HLR caveat too (searched). The slide numbers differ (e.g. the "minimum to be up to six" line is at text line ~2219). Posters are the partner agencies' material: attribute them to the agency.

Session 39 — 2026-10-01 — 2026 industry and academia workshop deck, slides 1–25

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 28 and 80–83, the screening table
• the deck's text for slides 1–25, and a search of the whole text layer for "CUI", "Pre-Decisional" and "export" (none)
• the images of all 15 text-poor slides in 1–25, plus slides 4–7, 13, 15, 16, 18 and 25 to check the text
• for checks: ADD Rev C's data-gap list (p. 263), the pages on RT-7, RT-2, the fission element, the Initial Surface Habitat, Key definition tasks (MD-05), Architecture definition process (workshops, performance chart), Why Moon to Mars (the white paper's graphics), the Workshops page, the manifest row; searches of all sources for "Foundational Surface Habitat" and "Lunar Surface Specification" (only the two 2026 workshop decks) and of the Glossary for "E3" (none)

Created:

• 2026 industry and academia workshop deck, slides 1–25; the page says slides 26–50 are not yet recorded

• queue.md, index.md (source row)

Updated:

• RT-7: slide 25 names the nine international standards, which match the Update's nine badges by name ("ECLSS" for "Life Support"; labeled the wiki's comparison); slide 16 repeats the Update's years. A new "Changes since Rev C": slide 25's table (international standards, the Update's badges, the seven "Lunar Surface Specifications (not yet publicly available)"; "E3" and "C&DH" not expanded by any source) and slide 24's multilateral interoperability picture (labels and legend only; arrows not tabulated)
• Lunar Nuclear Fission System: a "Changes since Rev C" bullet for slide 18 (fission surface power proposals in "pre-solicitation and solicitation periods"); no link to LR-1 or a date
• RT-2: a new "Changes since Rev C" for slide 18 (the NextSTEP "Appendix B" industry day, URL and address as printed, not expanded) and slide 4
• Key definition tasks, MD-05: slide 15 prints the ADD's "no fewer than six (6)" word for word; said not to settle the difference with the Update. A note on open question 28 to the same effect
• Architecture definition process: the stale "linked charts are not among the sources" corrected (2024–2026 charts and posters are; 2023 files, recording and animations are not, per the manifest); a paragraph on what the workshops changed as briefed (slides 4, 6, 17); slide 14 noted beside the Update's radar chart (labels and years compared, lines not)
• Architecture Workshops page: the stale "None of the linked files is among the wiki's sources" corrected, with a link to the new page
• Initial Surface Habitat: "No newer source names this element" now says "by its Rev C name"; a bullet for slide 24's "Foundational Surface Habitat", recorded, not matched
• open-questions.md: a note on 80 (no "CUI" or "Pre-Decisional" line in this deck; the file name's "for-export-control-v3" and the title slide's "Charts for Distribution" recorded as printed) besides the note on 28
• index.md rows: RT-7, RT-2, Initial Surface Habitat, Lunar Nuclear Fission System, Key definition tasks, Architecture definition process

Not changed: Lunar Utility Rover (slide 11 is a rendering with its name only); Why Moon to Mars (slide 7 reprints the white paper's graphics, labels checked); the data-gap pages and index (left for the next session, see below); Moon Base pages and Environment (slides 9 and 22–23 are visualization stills with no claim; slides 1–25 never say "Moon Base"). No new open question.

Surprising:

• Nine standards named at last. Slide 25 lists the nine International Deep Space Interoperability Standards by subject, which neither the ADD ("nine … exist") nor the Update (badges) does under that name; they match the Update's nine by name (the wiki's comparison).
• Seven "Lunar Surface Specifications (not yet publicly available)", including "E3", which no source expands.
• A habitat under another name, "Foundational Surface Habitat", on a slide in a different template from the rest of the deck.
• A procurement quiet period for fission surface power already in January 2026, two months before the Ignition-day nuclear fact sheet named LR-1 for 2030. The slide names no reactor or date, so the wiki doesn't link the two.

For the next session (same deck, slides 26–50): the page's slide table stops at 25; add rows and sections for 26–50 and remove the "not yet recorded" line. Slide 13's data-gap table was left off the data-gap pages and index: slide 47 (text line ~1801, "DN-005 L Surface-to-Surface Imagery") has more data-gap content, so the data-gap pages are for the next session.

Session 38 — 2026-10-01 — Ignition decks 3–6

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 76–83
• the four decks' text in full (18, 34, 15 and 14 slides), and a search of all four for "CUI" and "Pre-Decisional" (none)
• the images of all 22 text-poor slides (deck 3: 1, 3, 5, 11, 13–15; deck 4: 1, 5, 13, 23, 26, 28, 31, 34; deck 5: 8–10; deck 6: 1, 7, 11, 13), plus deck 3's slides 10 and 17, deck 4's 15 and 16, and deck 5's 4, 11, 12 and 14, whose labels the text layer separates from their values
• for checks: the three matching fact-sheet source pages, the Ignition page, deck 1's source page, Mars-forward, the manifest rows (sizes match the Ignition page's 8.32, 16.74 and 5.40 MB; deck 6 has no listed size)

Created (one source page per deck; decks 3 and 5 record only what they add to their fact sheets):

• Ignition deck 3, LEO: no Moon or Mars content; the core-module plan as an "alternate" option (the fact sheet's "Preferred Path"); the procurement timeline (slide 17, from the image) with its own Phases 1–3; "$250 million per year through end of ISS"
• Ignition deck 4, science: the eight Moon slides (13–20); Intuitive Machines selected for seven payloads to the south polar region, read as the fact sheet's unnamed provider (the wiki's reading, not matched to IM-3 or the late-2028 landing); the RFI's "permanent lunar presence by 2030" on a slide
• Ignition deck 5, nuclear: SR-1's objectives, one-year lifetime, key systems, timeline (June 2026 RFIs "for fast follow on FSP and NEP demonstrations"), Skyfall; slide 12's table SR-1 → LR-1 → 2030s, with "What SR-1 gives LR-1" and "What reopens for LR-1"

• Ignition deck 6, recap: the closing recap only

• queue.md, index.md (four source rows)

Updated, after the above:

• open-questions.md: notes on 77 (the "by 2030" phrase is on SMD's slide 16), 80 (no CUI line in decks 3–6; only deck 1 carries it), 81 (new bullet: the LEO plan "preferred" in the fact sheet, "alternate" in the deck), 83 (decks 3 and 6 also point to delivery on 24 March; listing dates kept)
• Lunar Nuclear Fission System: a "Changes since Rev C" bullet for deck 5's slide 12 (what SR-1 gives LR-1, what reopens) and slides 2 and 14. Moon Base relevance unchanged: the deck never says "Moon Base" (SCHEMA, "One home per topic")
• Mars-forward: deck 5's objectives, lifetime, Skyfall's tasks, the 2030s column; SR-1 paired with #1104 (labeled the wiki's)
• CLPS: deck 4's slides 14–16 under "Changes since Rev C"
• #0901 and #1104: a Related-pages bullet each for deck 5 (LR-1's reopened trades; SR-1 as an NEP demo), labeled as the wiki's pairing; Moon Base relevance unchanged
• RT-8: the LEO deck's "alternate option", procurement chart and budget line under "Changes since Rev C"
• Ignition page: its documents table now links all twelve source pages
• index.md rows: Mars-forward, RT-8, Lunar Nuclear Fission System, CLPS

Not changed: Phases, Needs and Missions and assets (the recap and the science deck add no phase, date or asset beyond what they hold; the Intuitive Machines selection is on CLPS, not matched to a mission); Gateway (deck 5's slide 11 only repeats the PPE as SR-1's bus); #0902 (deck 5 doesn't say the 2030s "100s kWe to MW-class" is surface power). No new open question.

Surprising:

• LR-1's design is open again. Deck 5 lists "Reactor and power conversion design trades", "Surface thermal rejection architecture" and "Landing loads, dust tolerance, surface ops" as what "reopens for LR-1", with industry competing to build it; the fact sheet only says SR-1 "will inform and enable" it.
• The LEO deck doesn't call the core-module plan preferred. It is the "alternate option", and NASA asks for feedback "for both options"; the fact sheet of the same day calls it "NASA's Preferred Path".
• "Permanent lunar presence by 2030" is on an SMD slide, not only in the Ignition page's RFI summaries (open question 77).

For the next session (2026 industry and academia workshop deck, slides 1–25): all Ignition material is now read. Decks 4 and 6 are mostly outside Moon to Mars; their source pages say which slides were not recorded.

Session 37 — 2026-10-01 — Left from session 36: Ignition deck 2's slides 34–65 on the element, gap and data-gap pages

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• deck 2's source page in full; the text layer for slides 34–35, 50–54 and 62 to check the quotations; a search of all sources for "Human Pressurized Exploration" (deck 2 only) and of deck 2 for Gateway, pads, pathways, walls and shelters
• the pages updated, the Building the Moon Base fact sheet's habitation lines, the Users Guide's challenge rows on Technology and knowledge challenges, #0201's child gap 0201-02

Updated, element pages (under "Changes since Rev C", "briefed at Ignition, March 2026"):

• Lunar Nuclear Fission System: slide 26's "Nuclear Surface Power Capability" (Phase 2, ending "Demonstrate reactor surface power"), slides 53–54 and 30's "fission surface power"; no reactor, project or element named; "Phase 2: Nuclear Power" includes RTG stations, so it isn't read as this element; slide 42 attaches no power program. In Moon Base relevance, the LR-1 bullet says the deck doesn't name LR-1 and the wiki doesn't match LR-1's 2030 to the Phase 2 demo. Two "(session 33)" phrases removed.
• Initial Surface Habitat: "None recorded … so far" replaced. The fact sheet's Phase 2 and 3 habitation, deck 2's "Demo Habitation" (Phase 2, "supported by external power"), "Initial surface habitats > 100 m³" (Phase 3, partner and US), slide 33's habitats, slide 42's "MPH" and "GATEWAY". None matched to the element, though Phase 3's "Initial surface habitats" shares its name; the guide's "self-sufficiency" set beside the deck's external power. "(session 32)" removed.
• Gateway: slide 42 joins Gateway to logistics and habitation, not transportation.
• Pressurized Rover: slides 56–57 keep it in Phase 2 as "JAXA - Human Pressurized Exploration Rover"; the Phase 3 column names none (silence, not an answer to question 81); slide 42.
• SCaN Networks: "None … so far" replaced. Deck 2's communications and PNT by phase (slides 14, 50–51); pairings by subject with LCRNS, LunaNet and the unallocated lunar time function FN-C-205 L, labeled the wiki's; slide 42's "COMM NETWORKS" not read as this element; the June 2026 communications RFP (slide 63); slide 3's communications hardware.

Updated, gap and data-gap pages (a labeled same-subject paragraph in Moon Base relevance each):

• #0903: wireless charging, dust tolerant connectors and cable deployment (slide 54), the power distribution hub (23), cable-laying rovers (57), and the Phase 2 "Demo Habitation" beside the guide's "Initial habitation" wording (62)
• #0801: the connector lines, with a note that the guide puts connectors under #0903 and the connector child gap is 0201-02
• #0101: the constellations and the clocks (slides 50–51); #0103: the existing paragraph extended with the "cell towers" and Phase 3 lines
• #0601, #0603, #0604: slide 35's ISRU lines, one parallel paragraph each ("rare Earth elements" set beside #0604 as the wiki's reading; the deck says nothing of metals)
• #0605: ISRU, and regolith manipulation and site preparation by phase (slides 21, 25, 28, 57), with the site-prep phase difference of question 83; #0505: "Corbelling, 3D printing, sintering" and site-prep rovers

• DN-017 L (full) and DN-018 L (short, pointing to DN-017 L): cargo return (slides 28, 34, 62), linked by the name of the guide's "Small cargo return" challenge; the deck says nothing on launch effects. "Session 32." removed from DN-017 L.

• queue.md, index.md (the five element rows)

Not changed: #0901 (already carries the power table), ISRU Systems, Phases, open-questions.md. The guide's gaps on these pages still say "The mapping is for Phase 1": that relabel is item 74. Deck 2 putting demonstrations in Phases 2 and 3 is not a conflict with the guide, whose challenges are near-term work for later phases (SCHEMA, "Moon Base lens"), so no question was opened.

Surprising:

• A new name for JAXA's rover: "Human Pressurized Exploration Rover", on slide 57 only.
• The deck's Phase 2 habitat demo uses the guide's words for its "Initial habitation" challenge (minimal life support, external power), the challenge the guide ties to #0903 and #0807, while the guide calls Rev C's habitat "designed … for self-sufficiency".
• No program for power. Slide 42 attaches programs to every capability area but leaves power under "Infrastructure" with only "COMM NETWORKS".

Polish: the deck 2 source page's "Related pages" now lists the element, gap and data-gap pages that carry its content.

For the next session (Ignition decks 3–6): nothing left from deck 2. The index rows for the gap pages are unchanged.

Session 36 — 2026-10-01 — Ignition deck 2, Building the Moon Base, slides 34–65

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 5, 6, 77, 80–82
• deck 2's text, slides 34–65
• the images of all 21 text-poor slides in 34–65 (34, 36–39, 41–43, 45, 47, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 60, 61, 63–65), plus slides 35, 48, 51, 54, 57 and 62, whose table columns the text layer runs together
• for checks: Phases, Missions and assets, the CLPS element page (CX-2, CS-8, CLPS 2.0), the HDL and fission element pages

Updated:

• Ignition deck 2: now covers all 65 slides. New sections for slides 34–35 (cargo return, ISRU), the Phase 3 per-year table and the summary slide (36–37), "Rising to the Challenge" (40), the capability areas and attached programs (41–42), transportation (43–48), communications and PNT, power, mobility, habitation and logistics (49–62, each with its table by phase), and the 2026 procurement timeline (63, read from the image). A "Date" note, and additions to the comparisons and oddities. Existing headings kept, so links into the page still work.
• Phases: per-year tables now for all three phases (2026–2036) with Phase 3's sums; the deck's dates paragraph; Phase 3's later key missions; a new section, "Capabilities by phase, in Ignition deck 2". The "not yet read" line is gone.
• Missions and assets: Phase 3's cargo return and ISRU; assets from the capability slides; the procurement timeline in brief. The "not yet read" line is gone.
• open-questions.md: notes on 5 (the tables lay the phases end to end, 2033–2036 for Phase 3), 6 (settled for Phase 3 from a source), 77 (the only "by 2030" is the LTV contract's old schedule), 81 (the mobility slides keep JAXA's rover in Phase 2), 82 (CX-2 is "500 kg Class", a possible reading kept to the question); new 83 (the deck's date, and five differences inside it)
• queue.md, index.md (source row, Phases, Missions and assets)

Surprising:

• Phase 3 has a per-year table (slide 36, 2033–2036, "$10 BILLION +"), and it sums to the guide's 29 launches and 28 landings. With Phase 2's, that makes the guide's figures per phase for both; Phase 1's launches still sum to 24, not 25.
• The summary slide disagrees with the Phase 3 table on 2036 launches (7 against 8).
• The deck was probably given on 24 March, not 26: its "issued today" items are dated "3 / 24" on its own timeline.
• RHUs first, RTGs in Phase 2, in the deck's power table, as in the fact sheet; the guide's Phase 1 target names RTGs.
• The LTV plan changed at Ignition: simpler Phase 1 rovers with a "one-year design life", "NASA as the only user", where the contract had been for a "fully capable" rover "to survive for 10 years", delivered "by 2030".

Polish, after the above:

• Needs: the deck's RHU and RTG lines by phase beside the guide's Phase 1 RTG target (guide kept as the reference), Phase 1 power, and "In Ignition deck 2" bullets under Phases 2 and 3
• Human-Class Delivery Lander: slide 47's "Human-class Delivery Landers", "Drawing on the Human Landing System for cargo", and slide 42's "HDL" (the wiki's match, by name); a "(session 33)" phrase removed
• CLPS: the deck's CLPS evolution, the two RFTPs and their classes, CP-32, planned award dates, the CLPS 1.0 science rovers
• Lunar Terrain Vehicle: the contract's change (slide 58), LTVs by phase (slide 57), procurements (slide 59), the planned 22 May award

• #0301 and #0901: the deck's power table by phase (labeled same-subject paragraphs, as before)

• index.md: the HDL, CLPS, LTV and Needs rows

Left for later, now a new queue item right below item 60, "Left from session 36 (small)": the deck's slides 34–65 on other pages it bears on. Element pages:

• Lunar Nuclear Fission System: "Demonstrate reactor surface power" in Phase 2, "Fission Surface Power" in Phase 3, slides 53–54
• Initial Surface Habitat: "Demo Habitation" in Phase 2, "Initial surface habitats > 100 m³" in Phase 3, slide 62
• Gateway: attached to logistics and habitation on slide 42
• Pressurized Rover: slides 56–57 keep it in Phase 2
• SCaN Networks: slides 50–51 (constellations, clocks, LunaNET baseline)

Gap pages, as labeled same-subject paragraphs:

• #0903: power distribution, wireless charging, cable deployment (slide 54)
• #0801: dust tolerant electrical connectors
• #0101 and #0103: clock demonstration and ensembles, surface "cell towers"
• the ISRU gaps (#0601, #0603, #0604, #0605) and #0505: slide 35

Also left: cargo return (slide 34) on the guide's "Small cargo return" data gaps (DN-017 L, DN-018 L). The index rows for those pages are unchanged.

Session 35 — 2026-10-01 — Ignition deck 2, Building the Moon Base, slides 1–33

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 5, 6, 9, 10, 76–81
• deck 2's text, slides 1–35 (34–35 only to see where Phase 3 ends; nothing written from them), and a search of the whole text layer for "CUI", "Pre-Decisional", phase words, RHU/RTG and "2030"
• the images of all 20 text-poor slides in 1–33 (1, 4–10, 13, 17–21, 25, 27–31), plus slides 2, 12 and 16
• for checks: the Users Guide's p. 4 text; the manifest row (32,893,819 bytes = the Ignition page's 31.37 MB); the Building the Moon Base fact sheet's source page; Phases; deck 1's source page

Created: Ignition deck 2, "Building the Moon Base", covering slides 1–33: the Gateway pivot, the phases (names, goals, figures with date ranges), the two per-year tables transcribed from the images (icons named only where the deck labels the same icon, as the wiki's match), key missions with their specifications, comparisons with the guide, the fact sheet and Rev C, oddities.

Updated:

• Phases: a fifth column of phase names; a "semi-permanent" against "continuous" note; a new section, "Figures per phase" (the deck's date ranges, rover counts and payload contents; a year-by-year launches and landers table for 2026–2032; "$10 BILLION" for each of Phases 1 and 2; the fact sheet's figures; the deck's conflicting dates); "In Ignition deck 2" bullets under each phase; the Artemis section's session phrasing folded into plain bullets, with the deck's "Complete first crewed Moon Base mission"
• open-questions.md: question 10's Ignition part settled from the sources (header marker); notes on 5 (the deck's dates), 6 (Phase 2 per phase from a source; Phase 1's launches sum to 24; a question for the project lead on 150,000 kg over four years against "38 tons per year"), 9, 76 (five sets), 77 ("semi-permanent"), 80 (no CUI line in deck 2), 81 (Pressurized Rover in 2031)
• Ignition page: the summary and its question-10 section now point to the fact sheet and deck as holding the phasing details
• queue.md, index.md (new source row, Phases row)
• polish, after the above:
  • Missions and assets: a new section, "Assets in Ignition deck 2" (labels and key missions by phase, with matches); the MoonFall Phase 2 note
  • "Changes since Rev C", labeled "briefed at Ignition, March 2026": Pressurized Rover (slide 22's specs; the fact sheet's Phase 3 line; and in Moon Base relevance the deck's Phase 2 and the 2031 icon), Lunar Terrain Vehicle (slide 11's specs, "LTV Gen 2", the fact sheet's "Multiple classes of LTVs"), Gateway (the pivot and repurposing slides; two session-number phrases removed)
  • labeled same-subject paragraphs: #0301 (RHUs, 120+ and "354+ hours"), #0901 (solar stations "10 kW+", "360 kWh"; nuclear demos), #0103 ("~10km range")
  • the source page's comparison with Rev C adds LD-05-L's "annual cadence" against Phase 2's "Semi-annual crewed missions" (already discussed on Key definition tasks)
  • after review: new open question 82 (the deck's LTV "500 kg maximum rover mass" and "10 km/hr" against the May release's vehicle figures, the conversions given only in the question), with a pointer on the LTV page; "five sets" of names on the Moon Base hub and Needs; index rows for Gateway, LTV, Pressurized Rover, Missions and assets and the Ignition page; tildes on the Phases at-a-glance figures; an icon-naming caveat on the source page (the "VIPER icon" appears seven times, so it isn't VIPER itself)

Not changed: Needs doesn't carry the deck yet (its Phase 1 RHU, Phase 2 solar and nuclear figures, Phase 3 logistics sizing). The synthesis item, or the slides 34–65 item, should add them there. The index rows for the element and gap pages touched are unchanged.

Surprising:

• The guide's p. 4 figures are this deck's, all nine, but here each set has a date range, and Phase 2's per-year table sums to its box. That settles question 6 for Phase 2 from a source.
• The deck disagrees with itself on dates. Slide 5 starts the phases now, 2029 and 2032; the figure boxes say "Now through 2028", "2029–2033" and "2033–2036"; the Phase 2 table runs 2029–2032.
• "$10 BILLION" for each of Phases 1 and 2: the first Moon Base cost figure in the wiki.
• A fifth set of phase names, from the Moon Base Program itself, and Phase 3 is "semi-permanent".
• Gateway "Not expected to reach initial operational status until 2030+", with HALO corrosion and overweight modules given as reasons.

For the next session (deck 2, slides 34–65): the RHU and RTG phase lines that session 34 flagged (text lines ~798–805 and 894) are on slides 54 and 57; set them against slide 9's "Radioisotope heating units" (Phase 1), slide 26's nuclear demos (Phase 2), the guide's Phase 1 RTG target and the fact sheet's lines. Slide 58 has "delivery to the lunar surface by 2030" (question 77). Check slides 36–39 (text-poor) for a Phase 3 per-year table and investment (question 6). Remove the "slides 34–65 are not yet read" lines from Phases (Phase 3) and Missions and assets ("Assets in Ignition deck 2"), and the "Coverage" paragraph on the deck's source page.

Session 34 — 2026-10-01 — Left from session 33: the fact sheets on Missions and assets, Needs, Mars-forward and RT-8

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• the text of the Building the Moon Base, nuclear power and LEO fact sheets in full, and their source pages
• for checks: the Ignition release's LEO and SR-1 paragraphs (raw text); Phases (the fact sheet's per-phase quotations, already there since session 33); Phase 1 functional gaps (targets, pp. 8–10); the "Thermal generators" row on Technology and knowledge challenges; the Moon Base relevance sections of #0301 and #0901; DN-002 M's title; a search of the sources for "RHU"

Updated:

• Missions and assets: a new section, "Kinds of asset in the Building the Moon Base fact sheet", phase by phase. MoonFall is named by the fact sheet (Phase 1, and "advanced MoonFall drones" in Phase 2, which the phases page doesn't have); the other matches are labeled the wiki's (rovers to the LTVs; relay satellites to Altus-1; RHU demonstrations to CS-8, the encyclopedia's heating demonstrations and Northrop Grumman's survive-the-night systems, which stay unphased). The observation satellites ("to bring the world along") are matched to nothing. The LR-1 row now quotes the nuclear fact sheet; SR-1 points to Mars-forward.
• Needs: the summary; a "What it brings" row in the at-a-glance table; the note on question 6 now gives the per-phase reading (the wiki's); a new section, "Phase 1 in the Building the Moon Base fact sheet", pairing four items with the guide's Phase 1 targets and the gaps the guide itself cites (RHU demonstrations with the power target and "Thermal generators": #0301, #0901); the fact sheet's Phase 2 and Phase 3 contents; the LR-1 bullet; the Phase 2 pairing table's first column; a fission-station row in the Phase 3 table; question 76 under open points.
• Mars-forward: "proving ground for missions to Mars"; SR-1 from the nuclear fact sheet (launch, mission, Skyfall's three tasks, the PPE bus, over 20 kWe, and the SR-1 to LR-1 sentence in full); the release's "activate the industrial base" line; a one-sentence comparison with the guide's Moon-to-Mars direction (the wiki's); Skyfall paired with DN-002 M (the wiki's).
• RT-8: a "Changes since Rev C" section from the LEO fact sheet and the release. No retirement date and no ESDMD use in the fact sheet, recorded as silence; the station figures count other things than Rev C's, so not compared.
• queue.md, index.md (Needs, Missions and assets, Mars-forward, RT-8 rows)
• polish: labeled same-subject paragraphs in Moon Base relevance on #0301 (RHU demonstrations, CS-8) and #0901 (Phase 2 and 3 power stations, LR-1), after the Users Guide's own links, with "The mapping is for Phase 1" left for item 73; the nuclear source page's "two Mars data gaps" slip fixed to one (DN-002 M); the Ignition release's source page no longer says RT-8 is "not updated with this"

Not changed: Phases (it already holds the fact sheet's wording; the other pages link there instead of copying it). No element page. No new open question: nothing here is a real contradiction.

Surprising:

• The fact sheet puts MoonFall in Phase 2 as well ("advanced MoonFall drones"), and pressurized rovers in Phase 3; the phases page has MoonFall in Phase One only and JAXA's rover in Phase Two.
• "RHU" against "RTG". The guide's Phase 1 power target names "radioisotope thermal generators"; the fact sheet has "nuclear RHU demonstrations" in Phase 1 and "RTGs" among Phase 2's power stations. The fact sheet doesn't expand "RHU", so the wiki prints it as is.
• The first reactor runs Mars-to-Moon. The guide frames nuclear work as Moon Base first, then Mars; the nuclear fact sheet flies SR-1 to Mars first, to "inform and enable" LR-1.

For the next session (Ignition deck 2, slides 1–33): deck 2's text layer expands "RHU" (line 233, "Radioisotope heater units (RHUs) provide heat") and puts RHUs and RTGs in phases (around lines 128, 799–804 and 894). Set those against the guide's Phase 1 RTG target and the fact sheet's Phase 1 RHU and Phase 2 RTG lines (Needs, "Phase 1 in the Building the Moon Base fact sheet"). Also check deck 2 for MoonFall in Phase 2 and for when the pressurized rovers arrive. The Lunar Terrain Vehicle and Pressurized Rover element pages don't yet carry the fact sheet's "Multiple classes of LTVs starting on Phase 1" (p. 2) or its "Operating pressurized rovers" in Phase 3, which differs from the Phase Two match for JAXA's rover; a later session (deck 2 or the synthesis item) should add them. Still for deck 2: the "Pre-Decisional --- CUI" line (question 80), the phase names and figures (questions 6, 76) and question 10's Ignition part.

Session 33 — 2026-10-01 — Ignition fact sheets and Ignition deck 1

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 5, 6, 9, 10, 22, 25 and 76–79
• the six fact sheets in full; deck 1's text in full, and the images of slides 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 21: all eight text-poor slides (2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 13, 17, 19) plus five with titles, tables or graphics (1, 4, 12, 18, 21)
• the Building the Moon Base fact sheet's PDF p. 1 (a dash lost in the text layer)
• for checks: the manifest rows of all seven files (sizes and SHA-256); the Ignition release's text; wiki pages Phases, the Ignition page, the -a28cdd source page

Created: seven source pages:

• Going back to the Moon, Ignition copy (a pointer page)
• Ignition fact sheet (its differences from the release only)
• Building the Moon Base fact sheet
• Nuclear power fact sheet
• Science fact sheet (Moon and Mars points only)
• LEO fact sheet
• Ignition deck 1, "Returning to the Moon"

Updated:

• Going back to the Moon (-a28cdd): dated 24 March 2026, from the Ignition page's listing of the identical file
• Phases: four sets of phase names; the fact sheet's figures, which make Phases 1 and 2 per phase; its contents for each phase; the 2028 landing plan under "Relation to the Artemis mission sequence"
• open-questions.md: notes on 6 (partly settled), 9, 10, 25 (mostly answered), 76 and 77; new 80 and 81
• Elements, "Changes since Rev C" (deck items labeled "briefed at Ignition, March 2026"):
  • SLS: the Centaur V replaces the EUS; "Standardized Block 1"
  • EGS: Mobile Launcher 1 umbilical changes under assessment
  • HLS: accelerated landers; the notional Artemis III and 2028 landing plans; "two pathways" beyond Artemis V
  • Human-Class Delivery Lander: the "HDL Programs" listed for heavy cargo beyond Artemis V (the wiki's match by acronym, no phase)
  • xEVA: AxEMU/xEMU in both plans; suit checkout on Artemis III or ISS; "sub 1g aircraft test platforms"
  • Orion: its part in both notional plans; permeable heatshield demo
  • Gateway: the nuclear fact sheet on the PPE; the Ignition fact sheet's wording on the pause
  • CLPS: "30 robotic lunar landings within three years"; larger landers; LuSEE-Night, VIPER, CADRE, MoonFall
  • Lunar Nuclear Fission System: LR-1's purpose and SR-1 first; nuclear power stations in Phases 2 and 3 (not named LR-1)
• queue.md, index.md (seven source rows, the Phases row, nine element rows)

Not changed: Missions and assets, Needs, Mars-forward, RT-8 and the gap pages (#0301, #0901) don't yet carry the fact sheets' Phase 1 list (MoonFall, relay and observation satellites, RHU demonstrations to "survive the lunar night"), SR-1's Skyfall payload or the LEO plan. The source pages hold them; a new queue item right below this one places them. Gateway's "Four newer sources" became "Newer sources".

How the two Going Back files relate: they are the same PDF. Both are 142,820 bytes with the same SHA-256; NASA serves it under two names in /2026/03/. The Ignition page lists the plain name as the Going Back to the Moon fact sheet, "Mar 24, 2026, 139.47 KB", which is that size. So the fact sheet the wiki has cited since session 1 is the Ignition fact sheet of 24 March 2026. The -a28cdd page stays the home for its content.

Surprising:

• Deck 1's text layer says "Pre-Decisional --- CUI//SP-EXPT/SP-PROCURE/SP-PROPIN" on every slide. None of the thirteen slide images opened shows it. NASA posts the deck publicly. The wiki cites it and asks the project lead (question 80).
• NASA used three sets of phase names on Ignition day. The release, the Ignition fact sheet and the Building the Moon Base fact sheet each name the phases differently, and the web pages have a fourth set (question 76).
• The Phase 2 figures are per phase, on the wiki's reading. "up to 60 tons of cargo during this phase through up to 24 landings", read as the guide's 60,000 kg and 24 landings. Phase 3 is given as "up to 38 tons of cargo per year", not a phase total (question 6).
• The Centaur V replaces the Exploration Upper Stage, on a "Standardized Block 1 configuration" (deck 1, slides 2 and 15). That answers most of question 25; Block 1B and Mobile Launcher 2 aren't mentioned.
• The Building the Moon Base fact sheet lists "HDL Programs" beside the HLS for heavy cargo beyond Artemis V. It doesn't expand "HDL"; reading it as the ADD's Human-Class Delivery Lander is the wiki's match by acronym, and Rev C has the HLS Program implementing the HDL, where the sheet lists two programs.

For the next session: the small left-over item comes first (see the queue). For the deck-2 item (slides 1–33): check deck 2's text layer for the "Pre-Decisional --- CUI" line (question 80). The Building the Moon Base fact sheet is read; compare deck 2's phase names, dates and figures with it and with the guide (questions 6, 76). Question 10's Ignition part is still for the deck-2 item.

Session 32 — 2026-10-01 — Nine more Moon Base pages (Ignition, CLPS, Artemis, two releases, three staff pages)

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 9, 10, 74 and 75
• the nine pages in full: the Ignition page (undated), the Ignition release (24 March 2026), the May and June 2026 Moon Base releases, the CLPS and Artemis pages (undated), and the staff pages of García-Galán, Geffre and Merancy
• for checks: the Users Guide's p. 4 graphic (no phase names), the phases page and the encyclopedia entry for phase names and Griffin, the August update for Voyager
• wiki pages: Phases, Missions and assets, CLPS, Lunar Terrain Vehicle, Lunar Utility Rover, the encyclopedia and PRISM source pages, #0805's targets

Created: nine source pages: Ignition page, Ignition release, May 2026 release, June 2026 release, CLPS page, Artemis page, and the three staff pages.

Updated:

• Phases: a "Phase names" section (two sets), the 2030 date in two RFI summaries, Phase Two and Three text from the Ignition release, Artemis cadence
• Missions and assets: Moon Base I–III on the Phase One rows, LTV and delivery awards, MoonFall's transfer stage, a Phase Three section (ASI habitats, CSA utility vehicle), the four late-2028 landings' payloads, PROMISE, planned solicitations, CS-8
• Needs: Phase Three's partner assets; under "without a phase", the post-Ignition requests to industry (supply-chain areas, LTV minimums, CS-8, commercial crew transport) and the June solicitations, with labeled pairings to #0201, #0301 and the Phase 1 relay target
• Moon Base hub: the other phase names, the leaders' former posts, the source list
• Elements: Lunar Terrain Vehicle (FLEX → CLV-1 and Eagle → Pegasus now related by the May release; the services contract's minimums beside #0805, units labeled; CX-2); CLPS ("Changes since Rev C" filled: new counts, cadence, CLPS 2.0, CX-2, CS-8, the four late-2028 landings); Gateway (paused "in its current form"; the Artemis page's older text); Human Landing System (Artemis III, commercial crew transport RFI, cargo-capable HLS in Phase Three, not equated with the HDL)
• Data gaps index: a table of the four late-2028 landings' payloads against DN-012 L, DN-017 L and DN-018 L (the wiki's matching)
• open-questions.md: notes on 9, 10 and 75; new 76–79

• queue.md, index.md (nine source rows; Phases, Missions and assets and five more summaries)

• After review: HLS and CLPS "Moon Base relevance" now lead with the source-made links (cargo-capable HLS in Phase Three; CLPS as Phase One's means and "a backbone of the Moon Base"); the CLPS counts (seven providers in Rev C, five vendors on the CLPS page) are stated without explaining the difference; the Strategy and Architecture Office's role is cited to the 2024 executive overview (PDF p. 20), not the staff page; "Not matched" notes on Lunar Utility Rover (CSA's vehicle) and Initial Surface Habitat (ASI's habitats); a SCALPSS note on DN-017 L; the encyclopedia source page links the staff pages and releases.

Not changed: DN-012 L, DN-018 L and the gap pages #0201, #0301 and #0805 don't yet carry the new payloads or pairings; the index tables and element pages do. RT-8 and Mars-forward don't carry the Ignition release's LEO and SR-1 details; the source pages link them as related pages only.

Question 10's Ignition part: not settled. The Ignition page's own text has no phasing details; it links the "Building the Moon Base" fact sheet and deck, which items 57–59 read. The deck-2 item should settle it.

Surprising:

• The phases have two sets of names. The Ignition release says "Build, Test, Learn", "Establish Early Infrastructure", "Enable Long‑Duration Human Presence"; the web pages say "Gain Reliable Access, Experiment, and Learn", "Build and Expand", "Live and Work on the Moon" (question 76).
• Phase Three has named assets after all: ASI's Multi-purpose Habitats and CSA's Lunar Utility Vehicle, in the Ignition release only. The CSA vehicle is not the ADD's Lunar Utility Rover (a NASA EVA and Human Surface Mobility element); the wiki doesn't match either asset to an element.
• "A permanent lunar outpost by 2030" in two Ignition RFI summaries, against Phase Three from 2032 (question 77).
• Griffin is "Astrobotic's" in May and "Voyager Technologies'" in the phases page and August update (question 78).
• The Artemis page still calls Gateway "central" (question 79).

For the next session (Ignition fact sheets and deck 1): the Ignition page links the Going Back to the Moon fact sheet as going-back-to-the-moon.pdf (24 March 2026, 139.47 KB) and the deck as 1-going-back-to-the-moon.pdf (26 March, 18.63 MB). That bears on how 2026-03-going-back-to-the-moon relates to the -a28cdd page already in the wiki. The Ignition page lists every fact sheet's date and size; see its source page. For the deck-2 items: check the phase names (question 76) and the 2030 date (question 77).

Session 31 — 2026-10-01 — The four new Moon Base pages

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• the four pages in full: the PRISM release (30 September 2026), the NavCube3-mini article (3 August), the Ion talk report (11 August) and the environment visualization page (undated)
• for checks: the Moon Base landing page's news list and links; the phases page on Phase Two; the solicitations page's fetch record; the Users Guide's interoperability paragraph (p. 7); ADD Rev C p. 41 ("GNSS–like") and p. 64 (NSN Commercial Services contract); the C&PNT white paper p. 7
• wiki pages: the Moon Base hub, Missions and assets, Environment, Needs, the data gaps index, DN-015 L, DN-016 L and the Moon Base sections of DN-007 L, DN-008 L, DN-013 L and DN-017 L; SCaN Networks' Moon Base section; open questions 10, 11 and 49

Created: four source pages:

• PRISM release
• NavCube3-mini article
• Ion talk report
• Environment visualization

Updated:

• Moon Base pages:
  • Missions and assets: the PRISM suites under "no phase stated"; NavCube3-mini's delivery on the IM-3 row; PRISM via CLPS
  • Environment: the visualization's reasons and Apollo 17 comparison; the talk's points, as reported (shadows and storage, line of sight, a distributed base, dust that changes with lighting); LEMS-SP under hazards; a new "Natural shelters" section (GIMLI)
  • Needs: two bullets under "Needs the sources give without a phase", and questions 74–75 under open points
  • Surface technology: GIMLI beside the lava-tube area
  • Moon Base hub: the source list
• Data gaps: the data gaps index has a new table of the PRISM suites against data gaps (the wiki's matching, with a fit column). Notes on DN-007 L, DN-008 L, DN-015 L (partial fit), DN-016 L, DN-017 L and DN-018 L.
• Elements: CLPS (PRISM suites, a link the source makes); SCaN Networks (NavCube3-mini, and where SCaN is named).
• Other:
  • the landing-page source page: three news items and the interactive marked fetched
  • open-questions.md: new 74 and 75, a third PRISM name under 49, and a "partly settled" marker on 10
  • queue.md, and index.md: four source rows, plus the Environment, Missions and assets, Needs, data gaps index, CLPS and SCaN summaries

Not changed: no tech-gap page. NavCube3-mini is orbital and uses Earth's GNSS, so #0101 (surface PNT) is untouched. The glossary's PRISM row stays as Appendix F prints it.

Surprising:

• Only one of the three PRISM suites has a site, and it isn't the South Pole. GIMLI goes to the Marius Hills Pit to look for a lava tube, "natural, ready-made shelters" that "could shift future habitat planning". No architecture source has a data gap or function for subsurface voids.
• NavCube3-mini tests Earth's GNSS from lunar orbit. It is not the "GNSS-like" lunar service the ADD expects to grow (p. 41), and it doesn't address surface PNT (#0101).
• The Moon Base Program's principal systems engineer said the base "may not be a single cluster", and could be distributed for terrain, lighting, power and landing reasons. The Users Guide doesn't say this. The wiki records it as reported (question 74).

For the next session (nine more Moon Base pages, including the Ignition page): the queue was reordered during this session; that item and five Ignition items now come before the workshop decks. Question 75 lists what this session's pages leave open. The Moon Base CLPS page in that item may say more about the PRISM suites' landers. For the partner-posters item: ASI's 2026 poster (2026-03-ip-asi) mentions "Lava Tubes", the only slide or document text that does. Add it to Environment, "Natural shelters", attributed to ASI.

Session 30 — 2026-10-01 — overview.md and moon-base/needs.md

Order. The needs page came first. The queue was split for safety once it was done, then rejoined when the overview was written. The item is ticked whole and the queue has no unchecked item.

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open question 72 and questions 3–9, 40, 58, 64, 65
• the Users Guide in full (pp. 1–16)
• the Moon Base Phases page (Phases Two and Three), the March 2026 fact sheet
• the tech-gap spreadsheet's rows for the 17 gaps whose traceability names a Phase 1 function
• the ADD's p. 78 bin sentence
• wiki pages: all eight Moon Base pages, Lunar functions, Elements, Lunar function allocation and the gaps and data gaps indexes
• for the overview: the ADD source page, Architecture framework, Segments, Objective decomposition, Key definition tasks, Recurring tenets, Humans to Mars and Foundational Exploration (B.5), plus the ADD text for its headline quotes. "not a manifest or requirements document" (p. 9), the "architect from the right" sentence (p. 13), "not exclusively serialized" (p. 22), "an open canvas" (p. 33), the prioritization sentence (p. 77) and the bin note (p. 78) were all checked in the text.

Created:

• Moon Base needs, by phase
• Overview: a map of the wiki with source citations. It covers what the architecture is and is not, the decomposition layers, segments and sub-architectures with gap counts, the four kinds of published need, decisions taken, the Moon Base and Mars, changes since Rev C, the contradictions question 72 lists as open, and reading paths and conventions.

Updated: Moon Base hub (Pages table), index.md ("Start here" line and the needs row), queue.md, open-questions.md (new question 73).

Surprising:

• NASA's own traceability ties 17 tech gaps to Phase 1 functions, and the guide cites only 4 of them. The tech-gap sheet names 10 of the guide's 31 functions. The 13 the guide leaves out include #0805 (rated 8) and five of the six Human Systems gaps, #0401 to #0405 (countermeasures and medical), which name one habitation function, FN-X-103 L. Eight of the 17 are in bins 4 and 5, where the guide names no gap.
• The guide's tech and data gaps are not Phase 1 needs in its own words. They are "associated with near-term Moon Base development efforts", to enable "essential phase two and phase three capabilities" (p. 11). Only the functional gaps are headed "PHASE 01". The wiki's "MB" shorthand is looser (question 73).
• Seven of the 31 functional gaps have no element in the ADD's Foundational Exploration tables: month-plus habitation, countermeasures, waste (which HLS has in Human Lunar Return only), water and gas transfer, resource identification and FN-P-102 L.

Not done:

• The "MB" label on the other pages is unchanged. A wording pass waits on the project lead (question 73).
• The overview takes most figures from the wiki's own pages, with their source citations carried over. Only the headline quotes above were rechecked in the source text this session.

For the next session: this was the last item in the queue. Nothing is left unchecked. What waits on the project lead is in open question 72 (formats, contradictions, facts only NASA can supply, fetch requests, the link checker) and in question 73. New work needs new queue items.

Session 29 — 2026-10-01 — Lint, part 2: open questions 1–70, stale "so far" claims

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue
• all of open-questions.md, questions 1–71
• the context of each "so far" hit outside the boilerplate
• for checks, by Grep: ADD Rev C's text, for PSR temperatures and for "measures of performance/effectiveness"; the 2026 documents, the Moon Base pages and the web pages, for Gateway; sources/manifest.csv, for question 10's pages; the tech-gap sheet, for "HM"

Updated:

• open-questions.md:
  • markers on 8, 22, 27 and 39, prepended in the existing "[Resolved …]" style
  • notes on 3 (the full ADD gives no measured PSR minimum) and 48 (B.5 doesn't use the phrase)
  • a closing note on 71, and one on 23 (HM aligned)
  • new question 72: the status of every question, grouped by what the project lead needs to do, plus what this session fixed and what it left
• Stale claims fixed (each page's updated: line is now session 29):
  • index.md: "Read so far" for the ADD. All 304 pages are read.
  • "Architecture Definition" source page: "which the wiki hasn't read yet" for Appendix C's MD list. It was read in session 22.
  • Lunar decomposition source page: "which no other source read so far does". This was no longer true after session 19 read the 2022 objectives.
  • Use cases and functions and Architecture definition process: "the pages read so far". The second now gives a search of the whole ADD.
  • ADD source page (earlier revisions not held) and the Update's source page, dated to session 9.
  • Gateway "read so far" on Human Lunar Return, Segments, Foundational Exploration, RT-1 and Gateway. Checked by a search of the 2026 sources.
• Gaps index: "HM" became "H2M", the ADD's acronym, in the table and legend. Humans to Mars said the index used "HM", and is updated.
• queue.md (ticked), index.md (the ADD line; a pointer to question 72)

Not done:

• Anchors: no method agreed (question 71).
• SCHEMA's "so far" boilerplate and two "so far" headings, kept as they are.
• About ten "no source read so far" claims, not checked against every source. They are listed in question 72.
• Not split. Leftovers went into question 72, not a new queue item.

Surprising:

• Few questions were settled outright. Besides the four marked earlier (1, 7, 13, 15), only 39 is fully settled by later reading. 8, 22 and 27 are mostly settled. Most of the rest are format choices that wait on the project lead (about 25), or contradictions between two December 2025 documents. The newer-source rule can't decide those.
• One stale claim had become false, not just dated: the lunar decomposition page said no other source gives the objectives' wording. Others were only out of date.

For the next session (overview.md and moon-base/needs.md): read open question 72 first. It lists which contradictions are still open (3, 4, 28, 31, 33, 37, 38, 40, 53, 60, 64), so the overview doesn't present a settled point as open, or an open one as settled. 3 (PSR temperature) and 4 (IPEx) bear directly on Moon Base needs.

Session 28 — 2026-10-01 — Lint, part 1: stale pointers, links, orphans, spot checks

Split. The lint item is open-ended, and session 26 ran out of time, so this session did part 1 and queued part 2 right below it (open question 71).

Read:

• schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, and the headings of open questions 1–70
• the context around every stale pointer the session 27 entry listed
• the Strategy and Objectives, Components and Feature Stories source pages
• the glossary rows with no wiki page
• no source documents: lint works on the wiki itself

Checked (by Grep; no shell):

• Index against files: all 217 files (211 content pages plus six top-level) are in index.md.
• Broken links, by likely failure:
  • wrong relative prefix
  • gap or data-gap IDs that don't exist
  • links to overview.md or needs.md
  • source-page names: per name family, lines with any link equal lines with a valid one
  • folder pages: a first-letters check against the real file names
  • None found. Anchors were not checked.
• Orphans: three web-page source pages had no link from a topic page.
• Stale wording: "(queued)", "hasn't fetched", "not fetched", "later session", "in the queue", "will be read" and similar.
• Spot checks of repeated figures:
  • sub-architecture and segment gap counts
  • 75/76/77 unallocated functions
  • the 19 MB flags
  • "Artemis III" on every topic page
  • All agree.

Updated:

• "(queued)" pointers replaced with links, 18 on eight source pages: lunar power, FE C&PNT, planetary protection, reference frames, priority science, 2024 tech gaps, lunar mobility, international partnerships.
• White Papers page citations made links on twelve ACR24 source pages and the 2025 Update. Also on the Update: the Appendix R sentence now links the Industry Engagement page, which is held.
• Topic pages:
  • Elements: "(p. 69; queued)" now points to B.4's write-up.
  • Lunar use cases: "left to a later session" now points to open question 44.
  • Use cases and functions and Why Moon to Mars: plain web addresses now link their source pages.
• Orphans linked under "Related pages":
  • Strategy and Objectives page: from Objectives and Recurring tenets
  • Components page: from Segments and Architecture framework
  • Feature Stories page: from Architecture definition process
• open-questions.md: "(queued)" in question 54 annotated; a closing note on 70; new 71.
• queue.md (part 1 ticked, part 2 inserted). index.md: one line under the web-pages table saying older source pages and topic pages now link those pages. No page summary needed changing.

Surprising:

• The link graph is clean. Twenty-seven sessions produced no broken link that these checks catch. The stale material was all wording: pointers written before a page existed.
• Multimedia Resources stays nearly an orphan, on purpose: it holds nothing architectural.

For the next session (Lint, part 2):

• Go through open questions 1–70. Headings are at open-questions.md lines 7–2048, one per question. Several are marked resolved already: 1, 7, 12, 13, 15, 19 (in part). For each other question, check whether a later session settled it, for example:
  • 39: queue ranges, handled in sessions 23–24
  • 10 and 30: pages not fetched, partly answered in session 27
  • 22: Artemis III, recorded on every page Mark settled ones in the existing "[Resolved …]" style. Don't rewrite them.
• Grep for "so far" in topic pages: "the sources read so far", "Read so far" in index.md. All queued sources are now read, so some of these are stale. Keep SCHEMA's "Not established by the sources so far" wording as it is.
• Anchors: not checked. Leave them unless the project lead agrees a method (question 71).

Session 27 — 2026-10-01 — The 15 Moon to Mars web pages

Session 26 checked first, as its operator note asked. Both source pages (2024-12-acr24-lat-final-20241202, 2024-12-acr24-mat-final-20241031-2) exist, read as complete, and are in index.md; open questions 68–69 and the two C&N pages are there. Nothing to finish.

Read:

• All 15 pages in sources/text/pages/, in full (all are short).
• For checks: the 2024 overview's text (pp. 13, 20–23) against five pages; ADD Rev C's HLR text (p. 24) and a search for "NextSTEP"; the 2023 strategy document for the historical Mars studies; the wiki's goals and tenets tables; open questions 1–10, 22, 30 and 68–69; the White Papers and 2023-overview lists.
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue; Humans to Mars, Architecture definition process, Glossary, RT-1, RT-2; the two 2024 table source pages and the Update's.

Created: 15 source pages, one per web page, named after the text files (open question 70): moontomarsarchitecture (main), -architecturedefinitiondocuments, -whitepapers, -architectureworkshops, -architectureconceptreview, -architectingfromtheright, -components, -strategyandobjectives, -marsarchitecturestudies, -industryengagement, -internationalengagement, -supplementalreading, -featurestories, plus moon-to-mars-architecture-mars-architecture-trade-space and architecture-multimedia-resources.

Updated:

• Humans to Mars: a new section, "NASA's Mars trade space web page" (five areas, forward work); the reference-missions bullet now names the studies library.
• Architecture definition process: the product shelf by review and the white-paper count (under "Revisions produced so far"); two new sections, "Decision roadmapping on NASA's web page" and "The workshops: NASA's web page".
• Glossary: the web page's "trade space" definition in the comparison table.
• RT-2: "NASA's industry engagement web page" (NextSTEP, Appendices A and R, February workshops).
• RT-1: OIIR's three contact areas.
• open-questions.md: additions to 22 (two pages still say Artemis III lands crew; one says it is being updated) and 30 (trade-space page resolved as held; new evidence on "Lunar Logistics and Mobility"; two standards addresses; what the pages list but the wiki doesn't hold); new 70.
• Pointers: "(queued)" replaced on the two 2024 table source pages; the Update's "hasn't fetched" line on its trade-space link. Feature Stories' dates checked against the ADD's release dates.
• index.md (a new "NASA's Moon to Mars Architecture web pages" table), queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• Overlap recorded, not repeated. Five pages reuse the 2024 overview's text; their source pages give the overview page and only the differing words.
• "Not held" means not in sources/manifest.csv. No linked PDF, figure, article or gallery was opened.
• Not changed: segment, sub-architecture and element pages. The Components page adds nothing to Rev C and says it is out of date.

Surprising:

• NASA's White Papers page drops superseded papers. It lists 12 of the 13 papers of January 2024, missing only "Key Mars Architecture Decisions", and leaves out the 2022 "Systems Analysis of Architectural Drivers". Those are the two that the 2025 "Architecture Definition" paper says it updates. (The wiki's reading; the page doesn't explain.)
• A 2025 briefing nearly matches the Update's lost paper title. The February 2025 workshops briefed "Lunar Mobility and Logistics" (file …wp-lunar-logistics-and-mobility.pdf) and, to international partners, "Logistics, Mobility, and Cargo". This doesn't settle question 30, but it fits a loose label for the 2024 mobility paper (perhaps with the cargo paper).
• The web roadmapping text is a rewrite of the 2024 overview's feature (PDF pp. 14–15), not a copy. It adds a surface-before-orbit crew example and the "delaying — or accelerating" sentence, which the overview doesn't have. (A first search on whole phrases missed the overview's version, which wraps across lines; found on a second search.)
• The Components page flags itself as being realigned to the February and March 2026 changes. The Supplemental Reading page doesn't, and still has Artemis III landing crew.

For the next session (Lint):

• Stale "(queued)" pointers to the web pages (file:line as of this session's search): sources/2024-06-acr24-lunar-mobility-drivers-and-needs.md:131; sources/ntrs-20250010948-ACR25-WP-Lunar-Power-Strategy.md:23,137; sources/2024-12-acr24-international-partnerships.md:151–154,156; sources/2024-12-acr24-architecture-technology-gaps.md:154,157; sources/2024-12-acr24-lunar-reference-frames.md:117–119; sources/ntrs-20250010953-ACR25-WP-FE-CPNT-v2.md:23,147–148; sources/ntrs-20250010949-ACR25-WP-Planetary-Protection.md:25; sources/2024-12-acr24-artemis-enables-priority-science.md:129. Each source page now exists; the file names are in this entry's "Created" list.
• Plain-path references to the web pages that could now link their source pages: concepts/use-cases-and-functions.md:49 and concepts/why-moon-to-mars.md:606.
• Other "queued" wording to check: elements/index.md:278 ("p. 69; queued") and open-questions.md question 54 ("ADD Appendix C (queued)"; Appendix C was read in session 22).
• Also stale: Humans to Mars had "the wiki hasn't fetched" the studies (fixed); grep for "hasn't fetched" and "not fetched" for others that now have a page (the trade-space page, the international-engagement page).

Session 26 — 2026-10-01 — ACR24 lunar and Mars architecture tables (entry added by the runner's operator)

Session 26 was stopped by the 30-minute session limit before it wrote this entry. It ticked its queue item, and its pages are in commit c373038. The next session should check that work: whether the source pages for 2024-12-acr24-lat-final-20241202 and 2024-12-acr24-mat-final-20241031-2 exist, are complete, and are listed in index.md. If not, finish them before starting its own item. The session limit is now 45 minutes.

Session 25 — 2026-10-01 — ACR24 Mars white papers: ascent propellant, crew complement, EDL, surface power

Read:

• All four papers in full, text layer: ascent propellant (5 pp.), crew complement (4), EDL (6), surface power (5).
• Rendered PDF pages:
  • ascent pp. 2–4: the two three-column layouts, which study the dust-storm note belongs to, and Figure 2's key
  • crew pp. 2–3: Figures 1 and 2
  • EDL pp. 2–5: Figure 2's ellipses, Figure 5's table, Figures 6–9
  • power pp. 1–3: bold and italics, the six option panels, the slips
• For checks: the manifest rows; NASA's White Papers page entries; MI-4 M's wording on the objectives page; Appendix C's open-task table on Key definition tasks.
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, and open questions 12, 28, 47, 49 and 53–65. Also the MD-05 and MD-07 sections of Key definition tasks, Humans to Mars, ISRU Systems, Transportation Systems, the fission element page, gaps #0606, #0902, #1102, #1103 and #1105, data gaps DN-004 M to DN-006 M, and the five source pages with "(queued)" pointers.

Created: four source pages:

• Mars Ascent Propellant Considerations
• Mars Crew Complement Considerations
• Mars EDL Challenges, with Figure 5's table transcribed
• Mars Surface Power Technology Decision

Updated:

• Key definition tasks:
  • "The 2024 crew-complement white paper" under MD-05: five groups of considerations, three concepts of operations, the decision package, what changed by Rev C
  • "The 2024 white paper" in the MD-07 case study: how it was decided, what it fixes and doesn't, 10 kW to MW-class, the challenges, a table of the six options, the attributes, the Moon as testbed, what changed by Rev C
  • one bullet on the open-task lists (three open subjects with a 2024 paper); summary; sources
• ISRU Systems: "Mars ascent propellant (ACR24 white paper, 2024)", with a table of the three studies and "What changed by Rev C"
• Transportation Systems: "Mars entry, descent and landing (ACR24 white paper, 2024)", with "What changed by Rev C: Mars EDL"
• Humans to Mars: a hub section, "The ACR24 Mars white papers (2024)", with one row per paper and four observations
• Gap and data-gap pages:
  • #0902: a new first bullet in "Has the technology been chosen?" (the paper's scope note, placed first so the list runs by date), the two solar-flux baselines, a related bullet
  • labeled related bullets on #0606, #1102, #1103, #1105, DN-004 M, DN-005 M and DN-006 M
• Lunar Nuclear Fission System: a short "In the ACR24 white papers (2024)" with the "Moon as a Testbed" paragraph, labeled as the wiki's pairing
• "(queued)" pointers replaced: the "Why Moon and Mars?", "Architecture Definition", lunar power and 2024 overview source pages. On the 2023 overview's source page, the "Cited by" column for four 2023 papers the crew and power papers cite, and the power-paper note.
• open-questions.md:
  • additions to 12 (the scope note: relevant, not an explanation), 28 (no number, not settled) and 54 (both papers date their subject to 2023: supported, not settled)
  • new 66 (names, figures and slips)
  • new 67 (where the content went)
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• One home per paper, as in sessions 17–18:
  • crew and power on Key definition tasks, where MD-05 and MD-07 already live
  • EDL and ascent propellant on the sub-architecture of their subject
  • the Humans to Mars hub is new (open question 67)
• Pairings labeled. The power paper → MD-07 link is the sources' own: the 2025 "Architecture Definition" paper cites it as reference 4. Every other link to a task, gap or data gap is the wiki's, because none of the four papers prints an MD code, a gap or a data gap.
• 2024 figures kept as 2024. The 10 kW minimum (two crew, at most 30 days, "living in a pressurized rover") and the 2024 ISRU study (one mission, two crew descending) are set against MD-05 and MD-02 under "What changed by Rev C". They are not given as current.
• Not done:
  • no sizing of the crew-time pie chart, whose values are "notional"
  • no reconciling of the two solar-flux baselines
  • no mapping of concept labels ("Mars Ascent & Landing Vehicle", a Mars "pressurized rover", "Human-Scale Lander") to ADD elements
  • no Moon Base relevance changes

Surprising:

• The power decision is narrower than it sounds. Fission is the "primary" technology for "initial" missions only. It "does not dictate funding for technology development or restrict other power technologies", and backup systems remain "an open area". That fits #0902 keeping its solar and fuel-cell child gaps, but no source says that is the reason.
• Both minimum cases put two crew on the surface: the power paper's 10 kW case and the 2024 ISRU study's mission. A year later MD-05 set the floor at four.
• Landed mass grew between documents. The EDL paper's text says "over 20 metric tons", its figure 26–36 t, and #1103's 2025 target 25 to 75+ t.
• Ascent propellant is "the single largest category of landed mass" for most proposed Mars architectures, yet its strategy is still an open definition task, and Mars ISRU (#0606) is rated 52 of 57.
• The crew paper calls the power paper by a third title, "Mars Initial Surface Power Decision".

For the next session (ACR24 lunar and Mars architecture tables, 2024-12-acr24-lat-final-20241202/ and 2024-12-acr24-mat-final-20241031-2/):

• Both tables have characteristics-and-needs sheets (c-ns.csv, use-cases-to-c-ns.csv, c-ns-to-objectives.csv; file list checked, contents not read). Neither 2025 workbook contains them (open question 42). This is the layer between objectives and use cases that the wiki has never had. Compare the rest with the 2025 decompositions on Mars objectives, Mars use cases and Lunar objectives; they are 2024 context, so say what changed.
• Only the lunar table has asset-function sheets (asset-function-matrix.csv, asset-function-table.csv). Compare them with the 2025 allocation on Lunar function allocation rather than re-listing them. The Mars table has an unnamed sheet24.csv.
• The four Mars papers are now cited from Humans to Mars; any Mars C&N that bears on crew numbers, power, EDL or ascent can point there.

Session 24 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 148–185: Appendix B.3 element function mappings, B.4 equipment, B.5 unallocated functions by use case

Read:

• ADD Rev C pp. 148–185, text layer in full. Rendered PDF pages 158, 166, 169, 175 and 176, where the text layer stacks or repeats IDs or a heading looked wrong.
• Lunar decomposition sheets, for the comparison:
  • all of "HLR Asset to Function Table" and "HLR Functions"
  • the header and rows of "FE+ Functional Allocation" for the functions in question
  • "FE+ Functions to Use Cases", by Grep: every use-case start line, and every line naming one of the 76 Unallocated functions plus FN-A-103 L and FN-A-105 L, mapped to its use case
• For checks:
  • ADD text by Grep: B.5 footer count (78, for 79 tables); FN-M-402 L, FN-G-106 L, FN-G-107 L and FN-C-205 L across the whole document; page markers for pp. 116–124
  • the Users Guide's p. 9 wording on the appendix
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, and open questions 11, 21, 24, 39, 42, 43 and 60–63. Also all 15 element pages, the allocation, Phase 1, use-case-and-function, lunar-function, objective-decomposition, RT-1, segment, ISRU and utilization pages, and both source pages.

Created: no new pages. The queue item's targets were existing pages.

Updated:

• Lunar function allocation:
  • a new section, "The ADD's own mapping: Appendix B.3 to B.5": what the ADD says about each part; B.3 and B.4 against the sheet, element by element (a count table with the differences); B.5 against the sheet's Unallocated, by function and by use case–function pair
  • the four functions in no ADD table for Foundational Exploration
  • B.5 in full, 79 use cases with their functions, marked for B.3 conflicts and Phase 1 gaps
  • the Phase 1 join table, with ADD B.3 and B.5 columns
  • "HLR against FE+", with what the ADD does
  • summary and "How this page is built"
• Phase 1 functional gaps: a new section, "Against the ADD's own allocation" (11 in B.5, 20 mapped to elements). The definition paragraph now quotes the guide exactly: "A full list of unallocated functions can be found in an appendix" (p. 9).
• All 15 element pages:
  • a "Functions (ADD Appendix B.3)" section on 13 of them, each with a table (ID, title, HLR/FE, Phase 1 gap), the differences from the sheet, and related unallocated functions from B.5
  • session 24 notes under "The 2025 Architecture Update" on the Lunar Utility Rover and Lunar Nuclear Fission System pages, which already had their lists
  • a short labeled "Shared function IDs" paragraph in Moon Base relevance where an element has Phase 1 functions
  • Gateway and the elements index: the mapping-number question settled (Appendix B has B.3.4.1.1, B.3.4.2.1, B.3.5.1, B.3.5.2, B.3.8.1)
• Elements:
  • a B.3 function-count column
  • "Elements by sub-architecture" answered: three elements stay in their own letter; no ISRU function is on any element
  • the "Moon Base links at a glance" table, now with a Phase 1 functional-gap count for every element
  • the B.4 note
• Pointers replaced:
  • Use cases and functions: the B.3–B.5 rows and three "next queue item" lines
  • Lunar functions: "Not here yet"
  • Objective decomposition: "Queued"
  • RT-1: "not yet read"
  • Utilization Systems: "B.4 (queued)"
  • Moon Base hub: the unallocated-functions row
• Short additions:
  • Human Lunar Return: B.5.1, FN-C-205 L only
  • Foundational Exploration: what B.5.2 holds
  • ISRU Systems: all 15 I functions unallocated
• Source pages:
  • ADD Rev C: contents row (all 304 pages now read), a slips bullet for B.3–B.5, the extraction note, the Users Guide appendix note
  • lunar decomposition: its "queued" comparison line replaced with the result; FN-I-207 L
• open-questions.md:
  • additions to 11 (the join extended to all elements and to the Phase 1 page), 21 (five B.3–B.5 slips), 24 (the new element-page section), 39 (the range held what session 23 said), 42 (B.4's "forward work" note), 43 (HLR and FE pair differences; FN-I-207 L's short title is in the ADD too)
  • new 64 (B.3 against B.5 and the sheet)
  • new 65 (which half of the guide's definition each of the 31 falls under)
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• The comparison was mechanical. B.3 and B.4 were compared with the sheet's asset tables function by function, for every element and segment. B.5 was compared pair by pair: each of the sheet's use case–function pairs naming an Unallocated function was found by Grep and matched to B.5's table for that use case.
• The counts are the wiki's:
  • B.5.2: 75 use cases, 137 pairs, 77 functions. The sheet: 77 use cases, 150 pairs, 76 functions. 133 pairs are common.
  • B.3: 194 FE element pairs, plus 8 for Equipment.
  • ADD FE tables together: 204 of 208 functions.
• Titles on element pages are the ADD's B.2.2 titles, which B.3 repeats in the places read; one print difference noted ("payload(s)" in B.3.8).
• Not inferred:
  • why B.5 lists FN-A-103 L and FN-A-105 L, which B.3 maps (whether B.5 predates the Lunar Utility Rover, for example)
  • why FN-M-402 L, FN-G-106 L, FN-G-107 L and FN-C-205 L appear in no FE table
  • which of the 20 allocated Phase 1 functions "need additional performance"
  • any assignment of Gateway's FE-only functions to its components

Surprising:

• The ADD contradicts itself on two Moon Base functions. FN-A-103 L (reconnaissance) and FN-A-105 L (robots with logistics carriers) are mapped to elements in B.3 and listed as unallocated in B.5. Both are Phase 1 functional gaps.
• The Users Guide's 31 split 11 and 20, though not cleanly. 11 are in the ADD's unallocated list (B.5) and 20 are only mapped (B.3). But four of the 11 are also mapped in B.3 (FN-A-103 L, FN-A-105 L, FN-P-101 L, FN-P-301 L), so only seven are purely unallocated. The split would fit the guide's two-part definition, but the guide never says which is which. Its "full list" is "of unallocated functions", not of functional gaps; the earlier paraphrase on the Phase 1 page was loose and is fixed.
• Unloading 1000s of kg is mapped nowhere in the ADD. The cargo lander delivers "a moderate amount of cargo (1000s of kg)", but FN-M-402 L, unloading it, is in no ADD table for Foundational Exploration. The sheet marks it Unallocated under 17 use cases.
• No element performs any ISRU function. All 15 are in B.5. Only three elements stay within their own sub-architecture's letter (EGS, the fission system, the cargo lander).
• The Initial Surface Habitat carries 9 of the 31 Phase 1 functional gaps, the most of any element.
• B.3 and the sheet agree on every FE pair B.3 prints. The sheet has six more, plus a generic "Communication/PNT Asset" that the ADD has no table for.

For the next session (ACR24 Mars white papers: ascent propellant, crew complement, EDL, surface power):

• Appendix B is finished. No Mars function is mapped to an element anywhere ("forward work", p. 38), so the Mars papers' element-like content can't be checked against B.3. Note any Mars element they name on Humans to Mars, not as a new element page.
• Two Mars papers are already cited elsewhere: the surface power decision (MD-07, on Key definition tasks and the fission page) and the crew complement paper (MD-05, open question 28). Several source pages list them as "(queued)" in their reference tables. Update those pointers.
• The 2024 Mars architecture table (a later queue item) has the C&N sheets the 2025 workbooks lack (open question 42).

Session 23 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C Appendix B Mars use cases and functions (pp. 127–147), plus the Mars objective decomposition

Read:

• ADD Rev C pp. 127–147 (B.2.3 and B.2.4), text layer in full. Rendered PDF pages 137–139, 141, 145 and 147, where the text layer separates function IDs from titles (pp. 130–134 were checked in session 15). Also pp. 148–149, to see what the rest of the item's range held.
• The Mars objective decomposition workbook, all seven CSVs: the key, "Use Cases", "Functions", "Functions to Use Cases" and "Use Cases to Objectives" in full; the two full sheets by row count, objective count and first and last rows.
• For checks:
  • the tech-gap sheet's traceability column, every Mars ID, and each gap's row span
  • the lunar workbook: the key, the LM objective wording, and searches for "(demonstration)" and for G 400/500 and C 300 IDs
  • ADD Rev C by search: "special region", "(demonstration)"
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions 21, 37, 39–44 and 52; the lunar list pages, the lunar source page, the hub, the objectives index, the gaps index, the Humans to Mars page, the planetary protection page and #0401.

Created:

• Mars use cases: all 148, by letter, with the functions the spreadsheet puts under each and the tech gaps citing each; the 11 with no function; numbering and group notes.
• Mars functions: all 263, by letter, with the use cases each serves and the tech gaps naming each; the "(demonstration)" count; notes on EVA, samples, planetary protection.
• Mars objectives: the 46 objectives by goal, with use cases, a wiki-made subject label, and the lunar comparison. Wording is linked, not copied (open question 52).
• Mars decomposition source page: sheets, conventions, the key, the ADD comparison, gap mismatches, "special regions".

Updated:

• Gaps index: the Mars counts; a new section, "All FN, expanded from the Mars decomposition" (33 rows, 16 gaps); the three pairings the decomposition doesn't make.
• Use cases and functions: B.1's Mars pointer, the B.2.3–B.2.4 rows, the B.3–B.5 rows pointed at the new queue item, groups outside the key, Mars counts.
• Objectives: an "In the Mars sheet" column in the 63-objectives table; AS-2's sentence; the eleven-objectives table now points to the Mars page.
• Humans to Mars: the "(queued)" pointer replaced with the three pages and TH-04 LM's nine Mars use cases.
• Objective decomposition: its "queued" line replaced with a paragraph on the Mars spreadsheet.
• Gap pages: "Against the Mars decomposition" notes in the Traceability sections of #0202, #0308 and #0401–#0404; a session 23 note on #1107.
• Source pages: ADD Rev C contents row for pp. 109–185 and a Mars-functions slips bullet; lunar decomposition "Mars" bullet.
• Lunar twins: back-links to the Mars pages on Lunar use cases and Lunar functions; on Lunar objectives, pointers for AS-02 LM (blank in the Mars sheet), OP-10 LM (seven Mars use cases) and the eleven.
• open-questions.md: additions to 21 (Mars-list slips), 37, 39 and 42 (the ADD says Rev B added Mars "characteristics, needs", which the 2025 workbook lacks); new 60 (gap pairings the Mars sheet doesn't make), 61 ("special regions"), 62 (AS-2 LM with no use case anywhere), 63 (Mars page format).
• index.md, queue.md (item ticked as pp. 127–147; new item for pp. 148–185).

How the pages are built:

• The queue item was split. Its range, pp. 136–185, ran past the Mars lists into B.3–B.5, which are lunar element mappings (pp. 148–149 checked). Following SCHEMA, the item is ticked for what was done and a new item inserted below. The Mars use cases on pp. 127–134, left by session 15, are included (open question 39).
• Three pages, not two. Unlike the lunar lists, the Mars list pages carry the decomposition links directly (use case → functions, function → use cases), because the Mars sheet has one decomposition and no allocation. Objectives get their own page, as for the Moon (open question 63).
• Counts were made by hand from the CSVs and checked by Grep on the finished pages: 148 use-case rows, 263 function rows, 59 use cases and 40 functions cited by a gap, 63 "(demonstration)", 33 "All FN" rows. The use case–function pairs were summed both ways (483 rows = 472 pairs + 11 BLANK).
• Not inferred: a definition of "special regions"; what "(demonstration)" marks; which Mars entries Rev C added (Rev C says it "Added Mars use cases and functions for" four science goals, p. 4, but without Rev B the wiki can't tell which); any element for a Mars function.

Surprising:

• AS-2 LM is in neither sheet's mapping. It is the one LM objective the lunar sheet leaves out, and in the Mars sheet it is "BLANK". Five other LM objectives (SE-01, SE-02, SE-05, AS-04, AS-05) have lunar use cases but none on Mars; OP-10 LM is the reverse.
• 63 Mars functions end "(demonstration)"; no lunar function does. 34 of the 39 robotics functions and all ten ISRU functions carry it.
• No Mars EVA functions. The Mars list has no M 100 group; the suit gap #0803 traces to UC-M-101 M, whose functions are utilization ones.
• Three gap pairings aren't in the decomposition: #0202's UC-A-403 M – FN-A-402 M and the four countermeasure gaps' UC-X-101 M – FN-X-101 M and UC-X-102 M – FN-X-102 M.
• The Mars key is the lunar key, yet Mars IDs use groups it doesn't name (G 400, G 500, C 300).
• The MI objectives follow the letters: MI-01 M takes all six power use cases, MI-03 M all four PNT ones.
• The Mars "characteristics and needs" were published once. The ADD says Rev B (Dec 2024) "Added Mars characteristics, needs, use cases, and functions" (p. 4), and the 2024 Mars architecture table has a C&N sheet; the December 2025 workbook lists C&N sheets but contains none (open question 42).

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 148–185, Appendix B.3 to B.5):

• It is all lunar. B.3 maps elements to lunar functions by segment (HLR and FE), from the note on p. 148: "Human Lunar Return segment elements form the basis for satisfying functional needs." Compare it with the lunar workbook's "FORWARD WORK" allocation on Lunar function allocation, element by element.
• B.5 is the Users Guide's "appendix" of unallocated functions (the wiki's match by title). Compare it with the workbook's 76 "Unallocated" and the 31 Phase 1 functional gaps (9 unallocated in the workbook).
• Pointers to update when done: the B.3–B.5 rows on Use cases and functions, "Not here yet" on Lunar functions, and each element page's "Functional Mappings".
• The 2024 Mars architecture table (2024-12-acr24-mat-final-20241031-2/, a later queue item) has "use-cases-to-c-ns" sheets: characteristics and needs, which both 2025 workbooks lack. Noted for that session, not read.

Session 22 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 186–198 (Appendix C) and pp. 291–304 (Appendix F) → glossary.md

Read:

• ADD Rev C Appendix C (pp. 186–198) and Appendix F (pp. 291–304), text layer in full. Rendered PDF pages: 188 (figure), 194–198 (the open-task table and the Appendix D divider), 291–294 (acronyms), 298, 300–302 (glossary rows the text layer splits) and 304 (quantity descriptors).
• For checks:
  • the tech-gap sheet's Definition Tasks column, searched for every task title without an ID
  • ADD Rev C by search: "integrated element", "moderate amount" and the other F.3 phrases, ESPRIT, ESDMD, AxEMU, ISS, MOXIE, xEMU, SysML; pp. 59, 61, 64 for the element descriptions
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue and open questions (21, 27, 32, 52, 54–56). Also the pages edited below, and the planetary protection, data gaps and gaps indexes and #1201, for comparison.

Created:

• Glossary:
  • F.1's 112 acronyms, with NASA's "Usage/Context" and a wiki-pages column
  • F.2's 107 terms in the printed order, with pages; 14 credited to the objectives document
  • F.3's quantity descriptors
  • comparisons: the body's key terms (pp. 11, 17, 18, 21), Appendix C's terms table, the "Architecture Definition" white paper, the 2022 objectives glossary, the executive overviews, Section 3.3 on data gaps, B.1 on deep space, the planetary protection paper
  • what Appendix F leaves out

Updated:

• Key definition tasks:
  • a new section, "ADD Appendix C: the full lists": what Appendix C adds for each legacy decision and completed task; the open-task table (MD-01 to MD-12 with category, Result and citing gaps); the 59 unnumbered tasks by category, split by whether a gap names them; what the lists show
  • summary, the LD/MD note, MD-02 and LD-103 notes, MD-05, the Table One cross-check, the chart section, "What changed by Rev C", the tasks-without-ID paragraph, LD-05-L's surges
• Architecture definition process: a new subsection "In ADD Appendix C.1" (value, four steps, the p. 188 figure); pointers.
• Humans to Mars: MD-02's three remaining target-state options; the open-task table (71 rows, 67 still open).
• Pointers and short notes:
  • ADD source page: contents rows, a slips bullet, the extraction note
  • 2024 overview source page and 2022 objectives source page: their "queued" glossary lines
  • Objectives: Appendix F against the 15 terms
  • Use cases and functions: no "Mars vicinity" in Appendix F
  • Lunar Surface Cargo Lander: F.3's "Moderate Amount", not read as its capacity
  • SCaN Networks: "integrated element"
  • Elements and Architecture framework: Appendix F's versions of their key terms
• open-questions.md: additions to 21 (ten slips and inconsistencies in Appendices C and F, and the "three new results"), 27 (mostly settled), 32 ("integrated element"), 52 (the glossary), 54 (not settled), 56 (ESPIRIT in the ADD too); new 57 (glossary format), 58 (F.3 and the cargo lander), 59 (where Appendix C went).
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• type: concept for the glossary, since SCHEMA has no glossary type (open question 57).
• Only Appendix F is transcribed. Other sources' definitions are compared, not added. Acronyms outside F.1 appear only where the ADD expands them (ESDMD, AxEMU, CEV, ESAS).
• The 15 objectives terms are not copied. The glossary links to the table on the objectives page (open question 52).
• Gap citations of the unnumbered tasks come from a search of the sheet. The first pattern missed titles beginning "ECLSS" and "EDLA", so each of the 21 "named by no gap" titles was then searched for directly.
• Not inferred: a capacity for the Lunar Surface Cargo Lander from F.3; a date of identification for any MD task; whether the open list is meant to be Mars-only; whether the lunar power paper's "integrated surface power element" uses the glossary's sense.

Surprising:

• MD-02 left three options, not one. The Mars target-state "down-select" removed single-mission scenarios and the most expensive one. It kept multiple short missions to one site, multiple long missions to one site, and multiple short missions to different sites.
• No open lunar task. All 71 rows of the open-task table (67 still open) are about Mars or name no destination. The lunar side has only legacy decisions and three completed tasks.
• Every unnamed task in the gap sheet is a key definition task. All 38 are in Appendix C's list, and 27 of the table's 71 tasks are named by no gap.
• "Trade space" has two definitions in one document: a range of options (Appendix C, p. 72, the white paper) and "an exploratory part of the systems engineering process" (Appendix F).
• "Large Cargo" is back. Rev A.1 says it removed the term from the glossary. Rev C's glossary has it.
• Appendix F has no "technology gap" entry, though it defines "Architecture-driven Data Gap".

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 136–185, Appendix B Mars use cases and functions, plus the Mars objective decomposition):

• Open question 39 says pp. 127–134 (Mars use cases) were read in session 15 but not written up. This item's range starts at p. 136, so start at p. 127: the 148 Mars use cases and the first Mars functions on p. 135. Session 15's Mars slips are under question 21.
• The eleven Mars-only objectives are on the objectives index; extend that table or move it (open question 52). Don't duplicate it.
• Use the glossary's terms. "Deep space", "Mars vicinity" (not defined in Appendix F), "Sol", "Deep Space Transport" and "Hybrid Propulsion System" bear on the Mars lists.
• Key definition tasks now lists all 71 tasks of Appendix C's open-task table by category. Link Mars functions to them only where a source does.

Session 21 — 2026-10-01 — Executive overviews 2023 and 2024

Read:

• Both overviews in full: the 2023 overview (12 PDF pages) and the 2024 overview (28), text layer and every rendered page.
• For checks:
  • ADD Rev C by search: "first woman", "Executive Council", "concurrence", "pencil", "model-based", FN-P-402 L (p. 121), several sub-architecture one-liners, and the segment text on pp. 27, 33, 37
  • sources/manifest.csv for both overviews and for the 2023 and 2024 white papers
  • the ACR24 Mars power paper's "updates a white paper" line, by search only
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue and open questions (29–35, 45–52). Also the pages edited below, and the ACR24 partnerships and technology-gaps source pages, the lunar functions list and the function-allocation page, for comparison.

Created:

• 2023 executive overview source page:
  • contents with printed and PDF numbers
  • Figures 1–4
  • the one-line goals
  • the 13 white papers of January 2024, with who cites each
  • what changed by Rev C; oddities
• 2024 executive overview source page:
  • a warning about PDF p. 8's text layer
  • contents
  • the goal lines that changed
  • the seven key terms against both overviews and Rev C
  • the 12 white papers
  • the coffee-maker figure and the elements spread, transcribed
  • what changed by Rev C; oddities

Updated (each with a new section "In the executive overviews (2023 and 2024)" or "In the 2024 executive overview", plus "What changed by Rev C"):

• Architecture definition process: the 2023 cadence figure; the 2024 description of the review, the cycle and the workshops; the 2024 plans, the 2024 accomplishments, the 2025 look-ahead. A line on Rev A's 13 and Rev B's 12 white papers.
• Key definition tasks: "seven key Mars architecture decisions" (2023); decision roadmapping (2024); the "Priority Decisions" chart transcribed, with the wiki's MD match; the MD-01 example; the overview's Mars power feature inside the MD-07 case study.
• Why Moon to Mars: the 2024 overview's version, with the infographic table and the facets compared with the 2025 paper's; the pillars' one-line definitions and the 2023 Figure 1.
• Elements: the six 2023 elements, element initiation, the coffee maker, where elements come from; a note under "Added in".
• Element pages:
  • Initial Surface Habitat and Lunar Surface Cargo Lander: their 2024 functions against the Dec 2025 sheet
  • Gateway, HDL, LTV, Pressurized Rover: the 2023 segment and the 2024 names
  • SCaN Networks: the two 2024 tiles
• Segments: the overviews' segment text against Rev C.
• #0101: the 2024 form of the gap (new section; see open question 55).
• Gaps index: a paragraph on the overview's gaps feature.
• Objective decomposition: the #2 pencil, the MBSE line, the figures, the shorter key terms.
• Shorter notes:
  • Architecture framework (key terms)
  • Sub-architectures (History: the first eight, the four "New for 2023")
  • Objectives (the one-line goals)
  • Recurring tenets (the queued pointer replaced)
• open-questions.md: additions to 29, 30, 31, 33, 35 and 48; new 53 (Mercury, 7 or 6), 54 (the ACR23/ACR24 split and MD numbering), 55 (where the content went), 56 (slips).
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• PDF p. 8 of the 2024 overview is not cited. Its text layer holds about 750 lines of white-paper thumbnail text that the rendered page can't show. A search for RT-1, RT-6, "1,500 kg" or "fission" in that file finds the thumbnails, not the overview.
• Moon Base relevance sections unchanged. Both overviews predate the Moon Base. Where a 2024 function is now a Phase 1 functional gap, the element page says so in the new section, labeled as the wiki's join.
• Preferred Rev C on the 2023 elements' segment (open question 33) and the 2025 paper on Mercury (open question 53).
• Not inferred: a Rev B element count from the 2024 tiles; whether "Mark 2 Cargo" names a Blue Moon version; whether the overview is the "ADD Glossy Summary" in Figure 4; the first edition's nine HLR elements; any figure from the 2023 Figure 3 (too small to read).

Surprising:

• The six 2023 elements were Human Lunar Return elements then. The 2023 overview adds the HDL, LTV, Pressurized Rover and three Gateway components "to the segment". Rev C has them all in Foundational Exploration. That may explain the ACR25 power paper's "Human Lunar Return … Lunar Terrain Vehicle, Pressurized Rover" (open question 33).
• The MD numbers look chronological. The chart's ACR23 side holds seven tasks, MD-01 to MD-07 by title, and the ACR24 side five, MD-08 to MD-12. No task is a "Where" question.
• "TBD meters" in 2024, 10 m (3σ) in 2025 for #0101, under a different title.
• The habitat grew from 19 functions in 2024 to 24 in the Dec 2025 sheet. The cargo lander's four are unchanged, and three of the habitat's four shown functions are now Moon Base Phase 1 functional gaps.
• Products moved from January to December. The 2023 cadence figure says "Annually in January"; Rev B and Rev C came out in December.

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 186–198, Appendix C, and pp. 291–304, Appendix F → glossary.md):

• Appendix C holds the MD list. Check the 2024 chart's ACR23/ACR24 split against it (open question 54), and whether Appendix C dates the tasks. Update Key definition tasks if it does.
• The glossary should compare Appendix F's terms with both key-terms tables: the ADD's (pp. 17, 18, 21) and the overviews' seven, on the 2024 overview's source page. Link to the objectives glossary rather than copy it (open question 52).
• ADD page numbers match PDF pages, so no offset there.

Session 20 — 2026-10-01 — Strategy and objectives development pp. 41–78

Read:

• The 2023 Strategy and Objectives Development document, PDF pp. 41–78, the text layer in full. Rendered PDF pages: 41–50, 52, 62, 64 and 70–78. That covers both Appendix B figures, every heliophysics, HBS and PPS table, the first page of each planetary objective, and the back cover.
• For checks:
  • the 2022 Moon to Mars Objectives (wording of the 13 science objectives)
  • the 2023 document's Section 5 (PDF pp. 21, 23)
  • the lunar decomposition CSVs (HS-03 LM, PPS-01 L wording)
  • ADD Rev C, by search: "decadal", "Integrated Research Plan", "FARSIDE", "TIDES", "gap analysis", "Executive Council", "anchor tenant", "Human Condition", "Norms", "Climate"; p. 98 read
• For edits and context: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue and open questions (45–52); the objectives index; Why Moon to Mars; Recurring tenets; Utilization Systems; RT-9; the 2023 and priority-science source pages. Also Objective decomposition (principles section) and Lunar objectives (as a format model), not edited.

Created:

• objectives/science-objectives-and-decadal-surveys.md, from Appendix C:
  • the five guiding documents
  • the table layout and headings by discipline
  • all 13 objectives with the decadal questions, goals or sections each traces to
  • the research rows that name the Moon, quoted
  • the third wording of HS-3 and PPS-1
  • what changed by Rev C

Updated:

• Objectives:
  • Appendix B merged into "Where the objectives came from": Executive Council tasking, track leads, 45 drafts, the April 2022 gap analysis, the feedback numbers, the Houston and London workshops, the centers, key themes, the summer scrub, the 9 → 10 goals sentence, track counts, the IAC release
  • "Neither document says which goal was added" replaced with Appendix B's "restructure of the science goals"
  • the LPS section's "next queue item" pointer now points to the new page
  • a note under the wording table on Appendix C's third wording
• Why Moon to Mars: the six remaining taglines; five quoted paragraph examples; the third version of the "Advance Science and Technology Priorities" label; a "What changed by Rev C" line (the ADD keeps the labels, not the descriptions).
• Recurring tenets: "Overarching Objectives Principals" renamed and "expanded from four to nine".
• RT-9: the 2022 Houston "anchor tenant" line, labeled as the wiki's pairing with the Update's "anchor customer".
• Utilization Systems: a related-pages link to the new page.
• Source pages:
  • 2023 strategy document: read status; contents rows for PDF pp. 41–78; the two Appendix B figures and the Appendix C layout; a pp. 41–78 summary; three "What changed by Rev C" bullets; session 20 oddities; the back-cover publication number
  • priority-science source page: its "queued" cell
• open-questions.md: session 20 additions to 48 (the 2022 "objectives gaps"), 50 (Appendix C's third wording), 51 (slips in pp. 41–78; the publication number) and 52 (where the content went, including the new page).
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• Appendix C got its own page, not a section on the already long objectives index (open question 52). The index's "Where the first three LPS objectives come from" heading is kept, because Utilization Systems and open question 47 link to it.
• Questions by objective, research by objective. Decadal question numbers are listed per objective, from the text layer (one objective per page; five pages checked in the PDF). Research rows are not tied to individual questions, because only shading links them.
• Not expanded or attributed: SHP, SWMI, AIMI, AIM, FARSIDE (undefined in the document). PPS-1's "Discovery Area" isn't attributed to the astrophysics decadal, because its row names no document. BPS is read as "Biological and Physical Sciences" from the guiding-documents list, labeled.
• Not inferred: which goal was added (Appendix B says only "a restructure of the science goals"); what the "four" earlier tenets were; a date from "NP-2023-03-3115-HQ"; whether the 2023 updates of the heliophysics and BPS decadals appeared.
• No Moon Base relevance changed. Nothing in pp. 41–78 mentions the Moon Base.

Surprising:

• The 2023 document disagrees with itself on wording. Appendix C prints HS-3 as "near-Martian, and near-surface" and PPS-1 as "deep space and deep time". Neither the 2022 document nor the document's own Section 5 has these words. It prints LPS-2 and HBS-2 in the 2022 wording, ignoring Section 5's edits.
• "Gap analysis" in 2022 meant something else. The draft objectives were checked against "current and planned Moon to Mars activities", and "12 objectives gaps" came out. It was called "an early assessment of NASA's current architecture", years before tech gaps and data gaps.
• Industry asked for an "anchor tenant" in June 2022. By December 2025 the Update speaks of NASA "serving as an anchor customer".
• The tenets started as four "Overarching Objectives Principals" before the summer scrub made them nine.
• Appendix C covers only half the science objectives. SE and AS (13 of 26) have no rows. ADD Rev C has no counterpart at all: its only decadal citation is about ethics (p. 98).

For the next session (executive overviews 2023 and 2024):

• The files are sources/text/docs/2024-01-2023-moon-to-mars-architecture-executive-overview.txt and sources/text/docs/2024-12-2024-architecture-executive-overview.txt. Check sources/manifest.csv for dates, and check each file's printed against PDF page numbers (open question 29).
• Pending pointers: Recurring tenets lists "the 2024 executive overview" as still queued; update it when read.
• Open question 47's pattern applies: one section per subject, labeled 2023 or 2024, with "What changed by Rev C". Rev A and Rev B summaries may belong on the ADD source page revision history or on Architecture definition process.

Session 19 — 2026-10-01 — Moon to Mars objectives: 2022 executive summary and strategy and objectives development pp. 1–40

Read:

• Both documents:
  • the 2022 Moon to Mars Objectives, all 13 pages; PDF checked on pp. 6–12
  • the 2023 Strategy and Objectives Development, PDF pp. 1–40. Rendered pages 4–14, 17–23, 26–33 and 35 were checked, for the figures and for every wording difference recorded.
• For checks:
  • the lunar decomposition's FE+ objective column, searched goal by goal for the exact 2022 wording. All 52 objectives were found.
  • ADD Rev C: pp. 9, 11, 13, 15–16, 37–38 and 107, plus searches for "Federated", "wireframe", "unity of purpose", "budget", "Executive Council", "AS-2" and "AS-02", "LPS-4" and "TH-04"
  • sources/manifest.csv
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue and open questions; both objectives pages; the tenets hub; Why Moon to Mars; objective decomposition; the process and framework pages; the H2M page; the data gaps index (one paragraph); the nine source pages whose references named the two documents.

Created:

• sources/2022-09-m2m-objectives-exec-summary.md
• sources/2023-04-m2m_strategy_and_objectives_development.md, with eight figures described from the PDF and both page numberings

Updated:

• Objectives, largely rewritten, adding:
  • where the objectives came from: 50 drafts in May 2022, 63 in September 2022
  • the vision–endeavor–goal–objective definitions
  • a category column, from the 2022 page headings
  • NASA's 2023 rationale for each goal, with the LI and TH groupings
  • all 63 by suffix
  • the eleven objectives not in the lunar sheet, quoted
  • the suffix definition
  • a 2022-against-2023 wording table
  • the 15-term objectives glossary, and "develop" against "demonstrate"
• Lunar objectives: the suffix section answered; the numbering section corrected (see Surprising); a new section comparing all 52 with 2022.
• Sections labeled 2022 or 2023, each with what changed by Rev C:
  • Why Moon to Mars: the pillars, the A.1 rewording table, the Appendix A taglines
  • Objective decomposition: the five principles, and why–what–how
  • Architecture definition process: the 2023 plan for strategic analysis cycles, the ADD and ACRs, and its figure
  • Recurring tenets: the wording, and the 2023 rationale for each tenet
  • Architecture framework: the objectives documents' definition of "architecture", and "wireframe"
• Smaller edits:
  • Humans to Mars: pointer to the ten Mars-only objectives; TH-04-M against 2022's LM
  • the data gaps index and the lunar decomposition source page: their stale "suffixes unexplained" lines
  • nine source pages: "(queued)" reference cells now link to the two new source pages
• open-questions.md:
  • question 19 marked resolved for the suffixes; linking the data-gap codes is still open
  • additions to 21 (LI in both documents) and 29 (a third document with offset page numbers)
  • new 50 (2022 against 2023 wording), 51 (slips in the two documents) and 52 (where the content went: glossary placement, the eleven objectives, one section per page)
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• PDF page numbers for the 2023 document. Its printed numbers are one lower. Every citation says "PDF p.", and the source page gives both.
• 2022 wording is treated as current. ADD Rev C and the December 2025 sheet print it. The 2023 variants are listed, not used.
• Not inferred:
  • which goal was added between nine and ten
  • why the lunar sheet leaves out AS-2 LM
  • why the ADD writes "TH-04-M"
  • the 2023 document's date beyond its upload path. It isn't tied to the ADD's 04/18/2023 release.
• Left on the source page only: the 2023 document's systems-engineering risks and its history of earlier programs (1989–2022). They are strategy, not architecture content (open question 52).
• No Moon Base relevance changed. Neither document mentions the Moon Base.

Surprising:

• The suffix question had a one-line answer. "Superscript text indicates the applicability to Lunar (L), Martian (M) or both (LM)" (2022, p. 6). Open question 19 had been open since session 4.
• The 2025 sheet is the 2022 text, word for word. All 52 objectives match, but for two final periods. The 2023 restatement's small edits never propagated.
• Session 16's "nor do they name an eleventh" was wrong. ADD p. 37 names LPS-4 as Mars-only. The eleven not in the lunar sheet are the ten M objectives plus AS-2 LM. AS-2 LM is the only lunar-applicable objective missing, and nothing says why.
• "Develop" and "demonstrate" are defined terms. "Develop" means to "fully meet architectural objectives"; "demonstrate" means "an initial capability". LI-4 to LI-8 (manufacturing and construction, precision landing, mobility, industrial ISRU, depots) are "demonstrate" objectives.
• The scope figure marks human presence on Mars as only "Partial Scope" of the objectives (2023, PDF p. 7, as the wiki reads the icons).
• The 2023 plan tied ACRs "to support the yearly budget planning process". Rev C says the ADD "is not a budget request".

For the next session (strategy and objectives development, PDF pp. 41–78):

• The file is sources/text/docs/2023-04-m2m_strategy_and_objectives_development.txt. Cite PDF pages; printed numbers are one lower.
• What's there:
  • PDF pp. 41–42: the rest of Appendix A, the intersections from "Intersection of Science and National Posture" on. Add them to the taglines table on Why Moon to Mars, which stops at "Exploration".
  • PDF pp. 43–46: Appendix B, the objectives development process. Extend Objectives rather than start a new section; it may say which goal was added.
  • PDF pp. 47–78: Appendix C, mapping the science goals and objectives to the decadal surveys. This is the "page 46" the 2024 priority-science paper cites. Its home is probably the science goals on Objectives or Utilization Systems; open question 47's pattern applies.
• Update the source page's contents table and "Read so far" line, and drop "next session" from the rows for PDF pp. 41–78.
• The Mars decomposition session should extend the eleven-objectives table on the objectives index, not duplicate it (open question 52).

Session 18 — 2026-10-01 — ACR24 white papers: priority science, humans in space, international partnerships, responsible exploration

Read:

• All four papers in full, text layer and every PDF page:

  • "Priority Science Objectives Enabled through NASA's Moon to Mars Architecture" (3 pages)
  • "Humans in Space to Accomplish Science Objectives" (4)
  • "International Partnerships and NASA's Moon to Mars Architecture" (4)
  • "Responsible Exploration" (4)

  Printed page numbers match the PDF pages in all four (the check session 17 asked for).

• Also:

  • sources/manifest.csv and sources/text/pages/, for dates and held references
  • NASA's White Papers page, for titles and descriptions
  • ADD Rev C p. 16 in the PDF, for the decomposition figure
  • ADD Rev C, by search and short reads: Section 3.4 (p. 82); RT-1 (pp. 84–87); RT-6 (pp. 95–98); the CLPS one-pager (p. 47); Section 2.4 (p. 69); the Non-polar Lunar Sortie (p. 30); "frozen", "far side", "architecture gaps", "ELSI", "ethic", "MEPAG", "OIIR", "exchange of funds", "Implementing Arrangement", "acquisition strategy", "Lunar Science Strategy"
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue and open questions; RT-1, RT-2, RT-6 and the tenets hub; Utilization Systems; Why Moon to Mars; the objectives index; the elements index; #1201; the LTV, Pressurized Rover and CLPS sections from session 17; Phase 1 functional gaps (definition); lunar use cases (by search); objective decomposition (p. 16 figure); the session 17 source pages, as models.

Created: four source pages, each with document details, contents and wiki homes, what the PDF shows that the text layer loses, key takeaways, what changed by Rev C, references held or not, and oddities:

• sources/2024-12-acr24-artemis-enables-priority-science.md
• sources/2024-12-acr24-humans-in-space-accomplish-objectives.md
• sources/2024-12-acr24-international-partnerships.md, with Figure 2 (NASA's pre-formulation process, with partner and industry lanes) transcribed from the PDF
• sources/2024-12-acr24-responsible-exploration.md

Updated:

• New sections, one home per paper:
  • RT-1: international partnerships, plus a sub-section on what "architecture gaps" means
  • RT-6: responsible exploration (ELSI)
  • Utilization Systems: priority science, with Table 1 and what each challenge needs
  • Why Moon to Mars: humans in space; and, in the pillars section, a note that the Venn figure is already in the 2024 partnerships paper and that two 2024 papers credit the pillars to the 2023 strategy document
• Short sourced notes:
  • Objectives: where LPS-1 to LPS-3 come from
  • Elements and RT-2: the 2024 pre-formulation figure
  • Recurring tenets: the stale "queued" pointer replaced
  • #1201: one labeled "Related pages" bullet (cryogenic sample return)
• open-questions.md: additions to 30 (references not held) and 47 (where the content went, and why); new 48 (what "architecture gaps" means) and 49 (names, dates and slips in the four papers).
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• Open question 47's pattern. Each paper is labeled 2024, and each section has a "What changed by Rev C" list labeled as the wiki's comparison. Nothing went under "Changes since Rev C", except one pointer to the 2026 Artemis III change.
• "Architecture gaps" is quoted, not applied. The 2024 definition sits on RT-1 only. ADD B.5, the sheet's "Unallocated" marks and the Users Guide's "functional gaps" are set beside it as the wiki's comparison. lunar-function-allocation.md wasn't edited: a 2024 paper doesn't explain the 2025 sheet.
• Figures. Figure 1 of the partnerships paper was compared with ADD p. 16 in the PDF (page resolution). It has the same layout and text, including two box texts the Objective decomposition page doesn't quote. Its "Reference Missions" label has a counterpart in the ADD figure that is too small to read at that resolution. That page wasn't edited; the comparison is on the source page.
• No element pages edited. The papers' element mentions (CLPS, LTV, Pressurized Rover, initial surface habitat) add nothing Rev C's one-pagers lack; the LTV's uncrewed science role is already in Rev C (p. 60).
• Not equated: the "Artemis, Ethics, and Society Workshop" with Rev C's "Artemis and Ethics Workshop"; "frozen" with "cryogenic"; the paper's Figure 2 with the website Rev C points to.
• No Moon Base relevance changed. None of the four papers mentions the Moon Base.

Surprising:

• The process came before the ADD did. The 2024 partnerships paper drew NASA's pre-formulation milestones a year before Rev C added Section 3.4. It names a step Rev C doesn't: an "Acquisition Strategy Meeting" to decide "whether to make, buy, or partner".
• The only definition of "architecture gaps". "Use cases and functions that do not currently trace to an element". Rev C uses the phrase twice and never defines it.
• The LPS objectives' origin is stated. NASA "adopted" the decadal's three themes "as the basis for the first three Lunar and Planetary Science Objectives".
• ELSI was "an open area of analysis" in 2024, and Rev C doesn't use the word. The cislunar volume of the sustainability strategy was still "forthcoming" a year later.
• The priority-science paper is lunar-only despite its title, and its three "architecture-dependent" challenges map neatly onto things Rev C added or lists: non-polar sorties, frozen-sample return, far-side work.

For the next session (Moon to Mars objectives: the 2022 executive summary, and the strategy and objectives development document pp. 1–40):

• The files are sources/text/docs/2022-09-m2m-objectives-exec-summary.txt (13 pages) and sources/text/docs/2023-04-m2m_strategy_and_objectives_development.txt (78 pages; this item is pp. 1–40).
• What the 2024 papers expect it to hold:
  • the three pillars, which two 2024 papers credit to the strategy document (Why Moon to Mars)
  • Appendix C (p. 46), where "each science objective may be further decomposed down to strategic research topics and specific investigations" (priority-science paper, p. 2). p. 46 is in the next queue item's range (pp. 41–78); note it there.
  • the full objective and recurring-tenet wording, which ADD Rev C points to (pp. 15, 107)
• Compare the 2022 objective wording with the December 2025 decomposition on Lunar objectives. Open question 19 (the L, M and LM suffixes) may be settled by the 2022 document's own codes.
• The tenets hub lists the two documents as queued; update it when they are read.

Session 17 — 2026-10-01 — ACR24 lunar white papers: mobility, surface cargo, reference frames, technology gaps

Read:

• All four papers in full, text layer and every page in the PDF:
  • "Lunar Mobility Drivers and Needs" (5 PDF pages)
  • "Lunar Surface Cargo" (6 pages)
  • "Lunar Reference Frames" (5 pages; p. 5 is references)
  • "Architecture-Driven Technology Gaps" (4 pages)
• Also:
  • sources/manifest.csv, for dates and held references
  • NASA's White Papers page (sources/text/pages/moontomarsarchitecture-whitepapers.md), for years and titles
  • ADD Rev C, by search: revision history p. 3; "Mean Earth", "reference frame", "shortfall", "push", "Argonaut", "cargo lander"
  • the Update's text on pp. 5 and 9
  • "Why Moon and Mars?" p. 5
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue and open questions; the element pages (LTV, LUR, HDL, cargo lander, CLPS, SCaN); the Mobility, Transportation, Logistics and C&PNT pages; gap pages #0101, #0805, #0806, #0808 and the gaps index; key definition tasks; lunar functions and lunar objectives (by search); the FE segment page; the C&PNT, Update, Why Moon and Mars and data-gaps source pages.

Created: four source pages, each with document details, contents and wiki homes, figures read from the PDF, key takeaways, what changed by Rev C, references held or not, and oddities:

• sources/2024-06-acr24-lunar-mobility-drivers-and-needs.md
• sources/2024-06-acr24-lunar-surface-cargo.md
• sources/2024-12-acr24-lunar-reference-frames.md (the SCaN page already linked this name)
• sources/2024-12-acr24-architecture-technology-gaps.md

Updated:

• New sections, one home per paper:
  • Mobility Systems: the mobility paper
  • Transportation Systems: the cargo paper
  • C&PNT Systems: the reference-frames paper
  • gaps index: the technology-gaps paper
• Elements:
  • LTV, HDL, Lunar Surface Cargo Lander and CLPS: an "In the ACR24 white papers (2024)" section with the 2024 capacities Rev C doesn't print. Pressurized Rover: a short section of the same name, with no capacity.
  • LUR: the "Lunar Logistics and Mobility" paragraph
  • SCaN: the stale "queued" link
• Gaps: #0101, #0805, #0806 and #0808 each got one labeled "Related pages" bullet. The gaps index lost its two "queued" pointers.
• Other pages:
  • Logistics Systems: the Update's two papers
  • Why Moon to Mars: the 5,000–6,000 kg citation
  • C&PNT source page: the gap-title check (bullet retitled "Gap titles in neither list"), and reference 11
  • Update, Why Moon and Mars and data-gaps source pages: "queued" pointers replaced
• open-questions.md: additions to 29 (page numbers), 30 ("Lunar Logistics and Mobility", and more material not held) and 35 (the gap titles); new 45 (figures that don't agree), 46 (is the Mean Earth endorsement current?) and 47 (where 2024 content goes).
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• 2024 material is labeled as 2024. Every section says the paper predates Rev C and lists "What changed by Rev C" as the wiki's comparison. Nothing went under "Changes since Rev C".
• No values read off bar charts. Printed labels and legend values are quoted: 800 kg, 490 kg, and the traverse lengths in km.
• PDF page numbers for the mobility paper, whose printed numbers skip 2 (open question 29).
• Not equated: the cargo paper's reference mission with the cargo lander element; its 500–12,000 kg gap with the element's capacity; the mobility paper with the Update's "Lunar Logistics and Mobility".
• No Moon Base relevance changed. The papers predate the Moon Base, and none mentions it.

Surprising:

• The method barely changed. The 2024 "narrow definition" paragraph is word for word in Rev C. Only two metric definitions were reworded: depth now depends on "definition tasks", not "decisions"; breadth measures "applicability".
• The count fits. 56 gaps in 2024, plus #0504 and #0505, minus #0602, gives Rev C's 57 (the wiki's arithmetic).
• Rev B's top five are all in Rev C's top six. Cryogenic Fluid Transfer (#1107, now rated 4) wasn't among them.
• The C&PNT paper's "2024" gap titles aren't 2024 titles. The one that can be checked was "High-bandwidth, High-reliability Surface-to-Surface Communications" in 2024, as it is now.
• A citation to nowhere. "Why Moon and Mars?" cites the cargo paper for 5,000–6,000 kg of annual logistics; that figure isn't in the cargo paper.
• Rev C names no lunar reference frame. The 2024 Mean Earth endorsement isn't confirmed in any later source read.
• No "Lunar Logistics and Mobility" paper exists on NASA's White Papers page, in any year.

For the next session (ACR24 white papers: priority science, humans in space, international partnerships, responsible exploration):

• The files are sources/text/docs/2024-12-acr24-artemis-enables-priority-science.txt, …-humans-in-space-accomplish-objectives.txt, …-international-partnerships.txt and …-responsible-exploration.txt. The White Papers page lists all four under 2024.

• Likely homes:

  • international partnerships: RT-1
  • responsible exploration: RT-6
  • priority science, and humans in space: Utilization Systems or Why Moon to Mars

  The recurring-tenets hub says these papers are queued (concepts/recurring-tenets.md, line ~86); update that pointer. Follow open question 47's pattern unless the project lead changes it.

• Check the printed page numbers against the PDF pages, as the mobility paper's skip.

• For the Executive Overviews item later: 2024-12-2024-architecture-executive-overview.txt reprints the reference-frames paper's text (found by search). Compare it there; don't re-describe it.

Session 16 — 2026-10-01 — Lunar objective decomposition

Read:

• All 18 CSVs in sources/text/docs/2025-12-2025-lunar-objective-decomposition/:
  • read in full: the key, the eight HLR and FE+ mapping, list and allocation sheets, and both asset tables
  • the full-chain sheets: their structure, and samples at the start, middle and end, plus the LPS-03 LM block where split and merged differ
  • checked by search: objective codes, "BLANK" rows, Unallocated marks, and rows with no mark
• ADD Rev C, by search:
  • the text layer for "maintaing", FN-U-402 L to FN-U-410 L (p. 126) and FN-G-107 L
  • "FE+" and "C&N" (no hits)
  • objective codes, which led to pp. 25, 28 and 38 (segment objectives) and the data-gap tables
• tools/fetch_sources.py: how sheet names become CSV file names.
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions (8, 11, 19, 21, 37–41); objectives index; objective decomposition; use cases and functions; lunar use cases and functions (in full); gaps index; data gaps index; data-gaps source page; HLR, FE and H2M segment pages; sub-architectures index; Phase 1 functional gaps headings; element pages (by search).

Created:

• sources/2025-12-2025-lunar-objective-decomposition.md:
  • the sheet inventory, set against the key's index of 23 names: seven listed sheets are missing, including every "C&N" sheet, and one sheet in the file isn't listed
  • conventions: "BLANK", "FORWARD WORK", the undefined "FE+"; split and merged sheets differ
  • the key's 12 letters and named hundreds groups
  • the check against ADD B.2
  • oddities
• objectives/lunar-objectives.md:
  • all 52 objectives, quoted, by goal
  • HLR use cases and the FE+ additions, with the data gaps that cite each objective
  • the use cases with no function (9 HLR, 17 FE+), set against the tech gaps
  • numbering against the ADD's 63
  • the L/LM evidence
• objectives/lunar-function-allocation.md:
  • 18 assets matched to wiki element pages by name (the wiki's matching), and FE+ allocation by asset
  • the 76 "Unallocated" functions with titles, and what they have in common
  • the Moon Base Phase 1 join (9 of 31 unallocated)
  • HLR against FE+
  • checks against the LUR and fission pages

Updated:

• objectives/index.md: the 52 codes by goal; 52 of 63; how codes are written; data-gap codes now titled; suffix evidence; links.
• concepts/use-cases-and-functions.md:
  • the Order paragraph, and the Letter and Number rows, now rest on the key
  • the B.1 bullet, the "first digit" passage and "What the lists don't tell you"
  • the B.3 and B.5 rows point to the allocation page
• concepts/lunar-functions.md: the "Not here yet" and "Not shown" bullets point to the new pages; a P-section paragraph on FN-P-102 L and FN-P-202 L in the sheet.
• concepts/lunar-use-cases.md: pointers in "How this page is built"; the UC-T-103 L note (Revision B.1's change confirmed in both sheets).
• concepts/objective-decomposition.md: the stale "next queue item" text replaced by what the sheet holds and its missing C&N layer.
• gaps/index.md:
  • new section "'All FN', expanded from the lunar decomposition": 11 gaps, 19 use cases, labeled as built from the sheet
  • the key's sub-architecture numbering beside the gap-ID groups (4 of 12 numbers agree)
  • the "All FN" bullet
• data-gaps/index.md: the objectives section links to the new page and notes the three Mars codes.
• sub-architectures/index.md: the key confirms the letters.
• Segment pages:
  • HLR: a one-line pointer, the OP-4 note, and the stale "B.2.2 (queued)" fixed
  • FE: a one-line pointer
• Source pages: the ADD (B row and frontmatter) and the data-gaps sheet (codes line).
• open-questions.md:
  • 8: answered from the key, except the place within a group
  • 11: three new kinds of join
  • 19: evidence added, still open
  • 40: what the sheet says, which doesn't settle it
  • new 42: what the sheet leaves out or doesn't define
  • new 43: mismatches with other sources
  • new 44: objective page format, and the list-page columns not added
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• The wiki works from the mapping sheets, not the full-chain sheets. The split full sheet repeats rows that the merged one doesn't, at least in the LPS-03 LM block.
• "FE+" is kept as a label. It is never equated with the FE segment. "HLR" is the ADD's segment abbreviation.
• The allocation is reported with its label. The sheet heads both matrices "FORWARD WORK". What the label covers can't be recovered from the CSVs, and the pages say so. The Phase 1 join sits only on the allocation page, labeled, and isn't in any Moon Base page or Moon Base relevance section.
• No element or gap pages were edited. B.3 is queued, and session 15 set the precedent for gap pages: one table on the gaps index instead.
• No full rewrite of the PDF-checked list pages (lunar-use-cases.md, lunar-functions.md): pointers only. The extra columns wait on open question 44.
• HLR ⊂ FE+ is claimed only for objective–use case pairs, checked for all 39 HLR objectives, and for asset–function pairs, apart from the four exceptions listed. Function–use case pairs weren't compared.

Surprising:

• The key explains the ID format. Letters numbered 1–12 in the B.2 order, with a name for each hundreds group. Open question 8 and the "unexplained order" on the use-cases page were answered by a sheet marked "FOR REFERENCE ONLY".
• No characteristics and needs. The ADD says the tables trace through that layer. The key lists five sheets for it, plus two "No CNs" variants of the full sheets, but none of the seven is in the file.
• 76 of 208 lunar functions are unallocated in FE+. They include all 15 ISRU functions and nearly all propellant functions. Energy storage is unallocated everywhere, the South Pole included. South Pole generation and distribution are marked both "Lunar Nuclear Fission System" and "Unallocated".
• HLR maps some objectives thinly. LI-07 L ("industrial scale ISRU") has only a dust use case, and TH-02 L (deliver elements to the surface) only "Conduct of end-of-life operations".
• The storage IDs are crossed. UC-P-101 L (South Pole) pairs FN-P-101 L with FN-P-202 L, so the generation and storage numbers run in opposite directions. That is relevant to open question 40 but doesn't settle it.
• One sheet in the file isn't listed. full-decomp-merged.csv appears identical to the FE+ merged sheet.

For the next session (ACR24 lunar white papers: mobility, surface cargo, reference frames, architecture technology gaps):

• The four files are sources/text/docs/:

  • 2024-06-acr24-lunar-mobility-drivers-and-needs.txt
  • 2024-06-acr24-lunar-surface-cargo.txt
  • 2024-12-acr24-lunar-reference-frames.txt
  • 2024-12-acr24-architecture-technology-gaps.txt

  Check the manifest for dates.

• These are 2024 context. SCHEMA says to state what changed since. The ACR24 tech-gaps paper is the "associated white paper published in 2024" that ADD p. 77 cites (footnote 23); the gaps index says it is queued. Compare its gap list and method with the Rev C pages, and record renumbered or retired gaps without rewriting the gap pages.

• Lunar mobility and surface cargo bear on the LTV, Pressurized Rover, LUR, HDL and cargo lander pages, and on #0805, #0806 and #0808. The FE+ allocation (now on the wiki) shows which mobility functions are unallocated: FN-M-303 L, FN-M-402 L, FN-M-502 L, FN-M-602 L.
• Lunar reference frames bears on the C&PNT sub-architecture, #0101 and FN-C-205 L (lunar time scale, on the "Communication/PNT Asset" in FE+).
• One source page per paper, following the ACR25 pages.

Session 15 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 105–135: Appendix A and Appendix B lunar use cases and functions

Read:

• ADD Rev C pp. 104–136 in full (text layer), with the PDF checked on pp. 105–127 and 130–134:
  • pp. 105–107: Appendix A. p. 105 has the "Three Pillars of Exploration" Venn figure.
  • p. 108: the Appendix B divider. A.3 is one paragraph on p. 107.
  • p. 109: B.1
  • pp. 110–117: 163 lunar use cases
  • pp. 117–127: 208 lunar functions
  • pp. 127–134: 148 Mars use cases
  • p. 135: the first 20 Mars functions
• The ADD's contents, for the B.3–B.5 section numbers.
• Users Guide p. 10 in the PDF, and the text of all 31 Phase 1 functional-gap entries.
• Tech-gap CSV: every UC and FN ID in the "Architecture Traceability: Use Cases & Functions" column, found by search. Rows #0101, #0601, #0603 to #0606 and #0701 were read in full as spot checks.
• For edits: schema, index, the last three log entries, queue, open questions; objective decomposition, sub-architectures index, why Moon to Mars, objectives index, Phase 1 functional gaps, gaps index, #0807 (as a model), #1107; the ADD, tech-gap and Users Guide source pages.

Counts come from a search for ID lines, restricted to the text lines between the B.2.1, B.2.2 and B.2.3 headings: 163, 208 and 148. Per-letter totals add up, and no ID appears twice.

Created:

• concepts/use-cases-and-functions.md: a hub for Appendix B.
  • B.1 quoted: support functions, independent lunar/Mars numbering, "deep space" and "Mars vicinity"
  • what B.2 to B.5 hold, with page ranges
  • how to read an ID
  • where the IDs are used
  • what the lists don't say
• concepts/lunar-use-cases.md: all 163, by letter, with a "Tech gaps" column. 61 are cited.
• concepts/lunar-functions.md: all 208, by letter.
  • Columns: "Tech gaps" (41 named) and "Moon Base Phase 1" (31; 10 on both lists).
  • A full comparison of the Users Guide's 31 entries with the ADD.

Updated:

• concepts/why-moon-to-mars.md:
  • new section on the three pillars, with the Venn figure as a table of regions read from the PDF and A.1.1–A.1.3 quoted
  • "Where to read more" now says A.3 is one paragraph and p. 108 is the B divider
  • intro, Sources
• objectives/index.md: new section "The objectives in Appendix A": 63 objectives in four categories, with the verbless sentence quoted as printed. Categories are not mapped to goals.
• concepts/objective-decomposition.md: "Where the full decomposition is" (read so far, queued, B.1's support functions); the ID bullet now splits function IDs from objective codes.
• sub-architectures/index.md: the ID-letter section gains the session 15 findings.
• moon-base/phase-1-functional-gaps.md:
  • a "Checked against the ADD" paragraph
  • a labeled FN-P-102 L note under Power
  • the 10-function overlap with tech gaps, linked
  • the guide's wording kept throughout
• gaps/esdmd-1107.md: UC-U-501 M's ADD title (p. 133), labeled, without picking a pairing; pointer to the lunar titles.
• elements/lunar-nuclear-fission-system.md: its existing line "FN-P-102 L (store energy)" now has a labeled note on the ADD's title and open question 40. Found by searching the wiki for every page carrying the guide's entry.
• gaps/index.md: a pointer to the list pages under the D.1 field table.
• Source pages:
  • tech-gap: column-guide link
  • Users Guide: comparison bullet
  • ADD:
    • contents rows 105–107, 108 (divider) and 109–185 (read, read-not-written, queued)
    • slips bullet
    • FN-P-102 L bullet
    • extraction note, and the PDF-checked pages
• open-questions.md:
  • 8: mostly answered from the source
  • 11: titles now recorded; the overlap is the same 10
  • 21: Appendix A/B slips
  • 37: UC-U-501 M's title
  • 39: what the range held, Mars counts and oddities
  • new 40: FN-P-102 L
  • new 41: list-page format, and where Appendix A went
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• Every list page was checked in the PDF, not just the scrambled ones. The text layer is clean on most pages, but it joins words at line breaks. The pages quote the rendered form.
• Reverse-index columns are source-made. A gap is listed against an ID only when the gap's own traceability field names it. "All FN" isn't expanded, because B.2 doesn't say which functions belong to a use case. So no power function shows #0901 or #0903.
• FN-P-102 L is flagged neutrally on both rows. The Phase 1 count is 31 by the guide's IDs, and the guide's capability targets weren't used to guess its intent.
• No titles were added to the 57 gap pages. One pointer from the gaps index does the job; #1107 is the only gap page edited.
• The Mars use cases were not written up (open question 39).
• No Moon Base relevance changed. The ADD doesn't mention the Moon Base. The Phase 1 column uses the guide's own IDs.

Surprising:

• The Users Guide's "FN-P 102 L" has the ADD's title for FN-P-202 L. It is the only ID–title mismatch among the 31; the rest differ at most in wording.
• Few functions are named by a tech gap. Only 41 of 208 lunar functions are, and 21 of the 31 Phase 1 functional gaps are named by none. The power gaps trace to use cases through "All FN".
• Utilization dominates the lists (62 use cases, 43 functions), though the sub-architecture has two tech gaps and no element.
• Appendix A is thin. It promises "a deep dive" (p. 105), but A.3 is one paragraph pointing to the white papers.
• Unsourced figure. A.1.2's "$15 billion in private investments … in a single year" gives no year or source.
• Wrong appendix letter. B.1 says terms are in "Appendix E"; they are in F.

For the next session (lunar objective decomposition → objectives/):

• The source is large. sources/text/docs/2025-12-2025-lunar-objective-decomposition/ holds 18 CSVs:

  • a key
  • full merged and split decompositions, overall and for HLR and FE
  • functions, use cases, functions-to-use-cases and use-cases-to-objectives, for each segment
  • functional allocation and asset-to-function tables

  If it can't be done in one session, tick what's done and insert a follow-on item (SCHEMA step 4).

• Compare the spreadsheet's titles with the list pages, as sessions 12–14 did for the gap tables. The two list tables are built to take extra columns: parent objective, and use case per function.

• Open question 19: the objective-code suffixes L, M and LM. The key sheet may define them.
• Open question 40: record how the spreadsheet titles FN-P-102 L and FN-P-202 L. That won't settle the guide's intent.
• "All FN". If the spreadsheet pairs functions with use cases, the tech gaps' "All FN" entries could be listed. Label that as built from the spreadsheet, not as the gap's own list.
• The asset-to-function and allocation sheets overlap ADD B.3 and B.5, which the queue puts in the Mars item (pp. 136–185), though they cover lunar elements too. Note what they hold; don't re-scope the queue.

Session 14 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 262–290: Appendix E, data gaps

Read:

• ADD Rev C pp. 261–290 in full (text layer), and every page from 262 to 290 in the PDF:
  • p. 262: the Appendix E introduction and the ten field definitions
  • pp. 263–264: the E.1 list and its paragraph on priority
  • pp. 265–289: the 25 catalog tables, DN-001 L to DN-006 M, one per page
  • p. 290: the Appendix F divider
• Data-gaps CSV: all 25 rows, plus the Key sheet, compared field by field with the ADD.
• Searches: the wiki, for "Appendix E", "262–290", "In Situ Monitoring", "In Situ Measurement" and "span all architecture segments".
• For edits: schema, index, log, queue, open questions; the data gaps index; the data-gaps spreadsheet, data-gaps white paper and ADD source pages; all 25 data-gap pages; the SLE segment page; the gaps index's Appendix D section, as a model.

Result of the comparison. 23 of the 25 tables match their spreadsheet rows field for field: title, description, need driver, data type, segment, objectives, targets, current state, impacts and benefits. Two content differences:

• DN-016 L: the ADD's data type is "In Situ Measurement" (p. 280); the sheet's is "In Situ Monitoring".
• DN-007 L: one sentence of the impacts is worded differently (p. 271), with the same meaning.

One print difference: the E.1 list drops "the" from DN-005 L's title (p. 263). The sheet's quirks are all in the ADD too. The PDF settled every interleaved text-layer layout, including the SCALPSS paragraph (DN-017 L) and the "Alternative solutions" paragraph (DN-018 L): both sit under Current State of Data, as in the sheet.

Created: none.

Updated:

• All 25 data-gap pages. Each:
  • the "Quotations below…" paragraph now says ADD Appendix E prints the same record and it matches, with its page. DN-0NN L is on p. 264+NN, and DN-00N M on p. 283+N.
  • the ADD is added to sources: (where missing) and to Sources; updated: is session 14.
• Extra notes on seven of them:
  • DN-001 L: the white paper's Figure Three is ADD p. 265
  • DN-005 L: the E.1 title slip
  • DN-007 L: a labeled note under "Impact if data is unavailable" with the ADD's wording
  • DN-015 L: the ADD doesn't settle the exponents
  • DN-016 L: the data type line gives both values and picks neither; the evidence is in open question 38
  • DN-017 L and DN-018 L: the SCALPSS paragraph and "ins resolution" are in the ADD too
• data-gaps/index.md:
  • new section "What each data gap's table holds (ADD Appendix E)", with the ADD's ten field definitions beside the Key sheet's wording, plus E.1, E.2, how the tables look, the check result and segments
  • the DN-016 L row and the data-type counts carry the ADD's value as a note
  • the stale "(queued)" is gone; the segment definition cites p. 262; SLE bullet; Sources
• sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-driven-data-gaps.md: new section "Compared with ADD Rev C, Appendix E"; the DN-015 L bullet updated.
• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md:
  • the Appendix E row (262–289, read) and a p. 290 divider row
  • a new "Slips in Appendix E" bullet, and the SLE bullet
  • the extraction note for Appendix E, and the list of PDF-checked pages
• sources/2025-12-acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.md: "queued" replaced by the confirmation that p. 265 is DN-001 L.
• segments/sustained-lunar-evolution.md: the Appendix E tables list no SLE data gap either.
• open-questions.md:
  • 20: the ADD doesn't settle the exponents
  • 21: three Appendix E items (the p. 262 running header, DN-005 L's list title, segments)
  • new 38: DN-016 L and DN-007 L
  • new 39: the next two queue items' page ranges and labels don't line up
• index.md (architecture blurb, data-gaps blurb, the data gaps index, DN-016 L and data-gaps spreadsheet rows), queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• The same minimal edits as sessions 12–13. No re-quoting: the pages already quote the sheet, and the ADD's text is the same.
• Where the two differ, the sheet's text stays on the page, with the ADD's beside it, labeled. Neither is corrected. This follows the #1107 practice (open question 37).
• The field definitions live on the data gaps index, with a pointer from the source page. They are not copied to 25 pages.
• No Moon Base relevance changed. Appendix E doesn't mention the Moon Base. No Priority section changed, because Appendix E gives no priority.

Surprising:

• The data-gap sheet matches its appendix slightly less closely than the tech-gap sheet. In Appendix D, one function ID and one missing space differed across 57 tables. Here one data type and one sentence differ across 25.
• The ADD merges impacts and benefits into one field, "A description of the architectural risk that the absence of this data incurs, as well as the benefits that the data offers" (p. 262). The Key sheet has two columns.
• p. 262's running header still says "Catalog of Technology Gaps", on the first page of the data-gaps appendix.
• No data-gap target carries a Moon or Mars icon, unlike every tech-gap target.

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 105–135, Appendix A and Appendix B lunar use cases and functions → concepts/):

• Text lines: p. 105 starts near the [page 105] marker; use ^\[page 1(0[5-9]|[1-3][0-9])\] to find the rest. Check figures and tables in the PDF.
• Open question 8: the parts of function and use-case IDs (the letter, the trailing L/M, the numbering). Appendix B.1 (p. 109) may spell out the ID format.
• The page range holds Mars material too. By the contents (ADD source page), lunar use cases start on p. 110, lunar functions on p. 117, Mars use cases on p. 127 and Mars functions on p. 135. So pp. 127–135 are inside this item's range, though the queue calls it "lunar", and the later Mars item starts at p. 136. Don't re-scope the queue; this is recorded as open question 39. Read what the range holds.
• Open question 37 (#1107's pairing): UC-U-501 M's use-case entry is probably on pp. 127–134, inside this range; FN-U-501 M and FN-U-502 M are on p. 147. Note what the use-case entry says. Also note anything in B.1 on how use cases pair with functions.
• Open question 11 (function-ID joins): the lunar functions on pp. 117–126 give titles for the FN IDs the gap pages cite. Decide nothing; record titles where a page cites the ID.

Session 13 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 231–261: Appendix D, technology gaps (second half)

Read:

• ADD Rev C pp. 231–261 in full (text layer), and every page in the PDF:
  • pp. 231–260: the 30 catalog tables, #0604 to #1202, one per page
  • p. 261: the Appendix E divider. Its text layer has a hidden Appendix D header and "261"
  • p. 147 (Appendix B, Mars functions), to check two function titles
• Tech-gap CSV: the 30 rows #0604 to #1202 (CSV lines 301–613), compared field by field.
• Searches:
  • sources/text/ for FN-U-501 M, FN-U-502 M and UC-U-501 M
  • the wiki, for "checked so far", "231–261", "FN-U-50", "High-performance processors"
• For edits: schema, index, log, queue, open questions; the gaps index; the tech-gap and ADD source pages; key-definition-tasks; the 30 gap pages and #0202.

Result of the comparison. 29 of the 30 tables match their spreadsheet rows field for field: title, rating, bin, description, impacts, state of the art, targets, child gaps and stars, UC/FN pairs, definition tasks and ✓, segments and sub-architectures. The exception is #1107 (p. 258). The ADD pairs UC-U-501 M with FN-U-501 M; the sheet has FN-U-502 M. The PDF confirms the ADD reading. The PDF also settled every ambiguous text-layer layout: the UC/FN pairs for #0702 and

1002, use cases with no function (#0801, #0901, #0902, #1003), and the Moon/Mars labels on

0903 and #1201. Text-layer artifacts ("Oeloading", "insuKicient", "insitu") were ignored and

never quoted.

Created: none.

Updated:

• 30 gap pages, #0604 to #1202. Each:
  • the "Quotations below…" paragraph now says ADD Appendix D prints the same table and it matches, with its page (pp. 231–260)
  • the page is added to Sources; updated: set to session 13. Frontmatter already listed the ADD.
• Extra notes on ten of them:

  • 0605: the ADD's IPEx sentence is the same as the sheet's; the IPEx table says so

  • 0701, #0806, #1101: "✓ included"

  • 0805, #1002, #1004: the "High-performance processors" child gap is unstarred in the ADD too,

    so by D.1 each of the four has one parent

  • 0902: the ADD's own table keeps the solar and fuel-cell child gaps beside ✓MD-07 (p. 245);

    the "Has the technology been chosen?" bullet and closing sentence now name both sources

  • 1107: "matches … except for one function ID", and a labeled note under Traceability with

    both FN titles from ADD p. 147

  • 1202: the missing colon after "0304-02*" is the sheet's alone (the ADD prints IDs in their

    own column)

• #0202: its unstarred note now covers all four (pp. 209, 240, 248, 250).
• gaps/index.md:
  • the catalog ends on p. 260, and p. 261 is the E divider
  • "How the tables look" and the Destination note now cover all 57 tables
  • "Checked against the spreadsheet" now gives the full result: two exceptions (print #0102, content #1107), plus the confirmed open items
  • Sources: pp. 204–260, 261
• sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-driven-technology-gaps.md:
  • the comparison section now covers all 57 tables, with a new bullet: "Same quirks"
  • the repeated-title bullet gains the ADD's evidence
  • Appendix D is cited as pp. 199–260
• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md: Appendix D row (199–260, read in full), and a new p. 261 divider row, following the existing divider rows.
• concepts/key-definition-tasks.md: "Which tasks a gap lists" now covers all 57 tables. The four ✓ marks are in the ADD too (pp. 234, 241, 245, 252).
• open-questions.md:
  • 4: ADD p. 232 has the sheet's IPEx version
  • 12: #0902's ADD table also keeps the non-nuclear child gaps
  • 14: all four unstarred in the ADD; one need or four is still open
  • new 37: the #1107 pairing, with a pointer to the Mars decomposition CSV for that session
• index.md (architecture blurb, tech-gaps blurb, #1107 row, gaps index row, tech-gap source row), queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• The same minimal edits as session 12. No re-quoting. The pages already quote the sheet, and the ADD's text is the same.
• #1107 keeps the sheet's list as printed and adds the ADD's pair as a labeled note. Neither is corrected. The note says nothing about which pairing fits "transfer" better.
• The Mars decomposition CSV appears only in open question 37, by file path, as a pointer. It has no source page yet and isn't cited on any wiki page.
• No Moon Base relevance changed.

Surprising:

• One real difference in 57 tables. Everything else, down to "TBR", "[TBR]", the "Sustained Lunar Exploration" slip and the unstarred duplicate titles, is identical. The spreadsheet is the ADD's catalog in table form, except for #1107's FN-U-501 M / FN-U-502 M.
• #0902's non-nuclear child gaps are in the ADD's own table, beside the ticked MD-07. Whatever the reason, it's not a spreadsheet lag.
• Page 261 looks like an Appendix D page in the text layer (header, page number) but renders as the Appendix E divider.

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 262–290, Appendix E, data gaps):

• p. 262 has the field definitions (text line ~20771); the list starts p. 263; the catalog starts p. 265. DN-001 L is at text line 20989. Find the rest with ^ID No\. DN- (DN-006 M at 22681).
• Same method: compare each table field by field with the data-gaps CSV, check every page in the PDF, then add a "matches" sentence and the page to each data-gap page's Sources.
• Open question 20: check DN-015 L's ejecta mass range ("10-6 - 102 g") in the rendered PDF.
• Note p. 262's segment definition, "The segment during which the data is needed, but not necessarily when it is collected", against the data gaps index.
• Check whether Appendix E gives the data gaps a priority (the sheet has none) and whether it says anything about Sustained Lunar Evolution (open question 21, "Data gaps and segments").

Session 12 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 199–230: Appendix D, technology gaps (first half)

Read:

• ADD Rev C pp. 199–230 in full (text layer), and every page in the PDF except p. 203 (the D.3 intro, read in the text layer only):
  • p. 199: D.1, the 13 field definitions
  • pp. 200–202: the D.2 list, the TechPort note, the bin spans and the #0602 note
  • pp. 204–230: all 27 catalog tables, #0101 to #0603
• Tech-gap CSV:
  • the 27 rows #0101 to #0603, compared field by field
  • all 57 titles, ratings, bins and Sub-Architectures fields, against D.2 and the ID codes
• Searches:
  • the ADD, for "Moon Base" (none) and "TechPort" (p. 200 only)
  • the wiki, for "asterisk" lines and the "Quotations below" line
• For edits: schema, index, log, queue, open questions; the gaps index; segments index; key-definition-tasks; the tech-gap and ADD source pages; the 27 gap pages; 10 second-half gap pages (asterisk line only).

Result of the comparison. All 27 tables match their spreadsheet rows field for field: title, rating, bin, description, impacts, state of the art, targets, child gaps and stars, UC/FN pairs, definition tasks and ✓, segments, sub-architectures, and every number. The only print difference is "FN-C-107M" under #0102 (p. 205), where the sheet has "FN-C-107 M". D.2 matches the sheet for all 57 IDs, titles, ratings and bins. Text-layer artifacts were ignored and never quoted: ligatures ("insuKicient"), split words, and scrambled label order. Where the layout was ambiguous, the PDF was checked; UC/FN pairing on p. 226 is an example.

Created: none.

Updated:

• 27 gap pages, #0101 to #0603. Each:
  • "Quotations below…" now adds that ADD Appendix D prints the same table and it matches, with the page (pp. 204–230)
  • the page is added to Sources; updated: set to session 12

  • 0102: notes "FN-C-107M"

  • 0202: 0202-01 is unstarred in the ADD too

  • 0504: neither source expands "FSP"

  • 0601, #0603: the ADD's table has the same "Sustained Lunar Exploration" wording

• Asterisk line on 19 gap pages: "The sheet does not explain the asterisk" is now the p. 199 definition, "a child gap with multiple parents". That is 9 in this half (#0201, 0202, 0304, 0501–0505, 0601) and 10 in the second half (#0604, 0804, 0805, 0806, 1001, 1104, 1106, 1107, 1201, 1202). Only that sentence and updated: changed on the second-half pages.
• gaps/index.md:
  • new section "What each gap's table holds (ADD Appendix D)": the D.1 table of 13 fields in NASA's words, mapped to gap-page sections
  • D.2 and D.3 orders, how the tables look (Moon/Mars icons), the TechPort note quoted, and the check results
  • Urgency and Depth rows gain the D.1 notes
  • the stale "catalog … is queued" sentence replaced
  • "By ID group" now quotes D.1 on the first two digits and names a sub-architecture per code, labeled the wiki's reading, linked to the sub-architecture pages
  • Destination note: the ADD's icons
  • Sources
• sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-driven-technology-gaps.md:
  • the Gap ID row is rewritten
  • Definition Tasks and Segments rows gain the D.1 definitions
  • new section "Compared with ADD Rev C, Appendix D"
• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md: the Appendix D contents row (pp. 199–230 read; pp. 231–261 queued).
• segments/index.md: "The tech-gap sheet doesn't define its column" now quotes D.1 on segments and urgency (session 8's request). Sources gain pp. 79, 81, 199.
• concepts/key-definition-tasks.md:
  • D.1's relevance rule, and the Moon/Mars icons
  • ID-less tasks are definition tasks by D.1's wording; whether they are key ones stays with Appendix C
  • depth's scoring wording tied to D.1
• open-questions.md:
  • 12: the asterisk item is done
  • 14: 0202-01 is unstarred in the ADD too
  • 16: icons; the new derived code table
  • 21: two ADD slips ("FN-C-107M"; "Sustained Lunar Exploration" in the ADD's own tables)
  • 27: ID-less tasks
  • new 36: the TechPort note
• index.md, queue.md.

How the pages are built:

• Minimal per-gap edits. The gap pages already quote the spreadsheet, and the ADD's text is the same, so nothing was re-quoted. Each page now says it matches and cites its ADD page.
• D.1 lives on the gaps index, with pointers from the source page, segments index and key-definition-tasks. It is not copied to 57 pages.
• The code-to-sub-architecture table is labeled as the wiki's reading. The ADD gives the rule, not the table. The basis: in all 57 rows, that sub-architecture is listed first.
• No Moon Base relevance changed. "Moon Base" doesn't appear anywhere in the ADD.
• The TechPort note is quoted once, with no TechPort data (open question 36).

Surprising:

• Appendix D adds almost nothing new per gap. The December 2025 spreadsheet is the ADD's catalog in table form, down to "TBR", "(TBD)" and the "Sustained Lunar Exploration" slip.
• "The first two digits are determined by the gap's most relevant sub-architecture" (p. 199). The codes run alphabetically by sub-architecture name (01 C&PNT … 09 Power, 11 Transportation, 12 Utilization), except that 10 is Autonomous Systems & Robotics. That is the wiki's observation; the ADD gives no table and no reason.
• "A gap's urgency score is partly based on the first segment for which the capability is needed" (p. 199). This is the only per-field link to the priority metrics in D.1.
• NASA points readers to TechPort for state-of-the-art detail (p. 200).

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 231–261, Appendix D second half, #0604 to #1202):

• Same method: compare each table with its CSV row field by field (CSV rows from line 301), check every page in the PDF, then add the standard "ADD Rev C's Appendix D prints the same table…" sentence and the page to Sources. Expected pages: #0604 p. 231, #0605 p. 232, #0606 p. 233, #0701 p. 234, #0702 p. 235, #0801 p. 236, #0802 p. 237, #0803 p. 238, #0804 p. 239; find the rest with ^ID No\. in the text file (#1202 starts at text line 20666).
• The asterisk lines on the second-half pages are already done; don't redo them.
• Open question 14: check whether 0805-02, 1002-02 and 1004-01 are unstarred in the ADD (#0805, #1002, #1004 tables).
• #0902: check whether the ADD's table also keeps the solar and fuel-cell child gaps after MD-07 (open question 12, "Still unexplained").
• #1202: the sheet prints "0304-02* In-flight …" without the colon; check the ADD.
• When done: update the gaps index "Checked against the spreadsheet" bullet, the tech-gap source page's comparison section, the ADD source page's Appendix D row, and index.md. If the second half also matches, drop the "checked so far (#0101 to #0603)" qualifiers in four places:
  • the gaps index ("How the tables look"; the Destination note)
  • the tech-gap source page ("Labels become icons")
  • key-definition-tasks.md ("Which tasks a gap lists")

Session 11 — 2026-10-01 — ACR25 white papers on NTRS: lunar power, planetary protection, FE C&PNT

Read:

• "Integrated Lunar Power Strategy Considerations", all 6 pages, PDF checked on all six:
  • p. 2: interleaved columns and Figure Two
  • p. 3: Figure Three, which has no text layer
  • p. 4: the nuclear and solar table, and Figure Four
  • p. 5: interleaved columns
• "Architecture-Driven Planetary Protection Considerations", all 6 pages, PDF checked on pp. 1–5:
  • p. 1: the bullets
  • p. 4: the fused heading, and Table One's Forward and Backward grouping
  • p. 5: Table Two and the "202" footer
• "Communications and Navigation Needs for the Foundational Exploration Segment", all 8 pages, PDF checked on pp. 1–7:
  • p. 3: Table One and the sideways diagram
  • p. 5: the three charts, two of them captioned "Figure One"
• Searches:
  • all three texts for LD-, MD-, ESDMD, #0, "Moon Base" and "definition task": none
  • sources/manifest.csv and sources/text/pages/, for cited papers
  • the White Papers web page, which lists all six ACR25 papers with the manifest's URLs
  • the data-gap CSV, for "planetary protection" (absent) and "contamination"
  • the ADD, for the Article IX sentence (p. 95)
  • the Users Guide, for its planetary protection wording (p. 14)
• For cross-links: schema, index, log, queue, open questions, plus these pages:
  • Power Systems, C&PNT Systems
  • the fission, SCaN, LTV and Pressurized Rover elements
  • key-definition-tasks, RT-6, Mars-forward, Human Lunar Return, Humans to Mars
  • gaps #0101, 0102, 0103, 0301, 0304, 0702, 0803, 0901, 0903, 1202
  • the Update and "Why Moon and Mars?" source pages

Created (4 pages):

• sources/ntrs-20250010948-ACR25-WP-Lunar-Power-Strategy.md
• sources/ntrs-20250010949-ACR25-WP-Planetary-Protection.md
• sources/ntrs-20250010953-ACR25-WP-FE-CPNT-v2.md
• concepts/planetary-protection.md: forward and backward protection, history, participants, Mars design implications with Table One from the PDF, Table Two, and where the topic appears in the architecture (#1202, MD-10, MD-11, RT-6, the Users Guide's Mars-forward area)

Each source page has the document facts, which paper the Update and the White Papers page mean, a contents map to the wiki homes, what the PDF shows that the text layer loses, the key takeaways, a comparison with the ADD or the spreadsheet, references, and oddities.

Updated:

• sub-architectures/power-systems.md, a new section "The integrated lunar power strategy (ACR25 white paper)":
  • segments, from HLR self-sufficiency to FE external augmentation
  • "survive or thrive"
  • the four drivers in a table
  • generation (the paper's table), storage (effective energy storage duration; the Li-ion one-fourth figure), transfer (cabling, power beaming)
  • Mars-forward, and what comes next
  • LD-101 and three gaps, labeled as the wiki's pairing
• sub-architectures/communications-and-positioning-navigation-and-timing-systems.md, a new section "Foundational Exploration needs (ACR25 white paper)":
  • users and challenges, and how the network grows (hubs, surface relays)
  • standards: the LunaNet frequency-plan table, 3GPP and 802.11 against LD-103, who negotiates
  • the four user-demand characteristics in a table
  • the 25–50 m navigation need against #0101's 10 m (3σ)
  • technologies, the 2024 gap titles, and MD-12 not discussed
• Elements:
  • lunar-nuclear-fission-system.md: a section on the paper's fission points, the August 2025 announcement, and the future "integrated surface power element"
  • space-communications-and-navigation-networks.md: the figure reprint (the wiki's match, by labels) and a short white-paper section
  • lunar-terrain-vehicle.md, pressurized-rover.md: "In the ACR25 white papers" (hub role; the power paper's HLR placement)
• concepts/key-definition-tasks.md: notes on LD-101, LD-103, MD-10, MD-11 and MD-12. The papers name none of them.
• Gaps #0101, 0102, 0103, 0301, 0304, 0702, 0803, 0901, 0903, 1202: a "Related pages" bullet each, labeled as the wiki's pairing. #0101 also has the 25–50 m comparison under Performance target. #1202's "queued" line is gone; its Moon Base relevance is unchanged.
• Other pages:
  • concepts/rt-6-responsible-use.md and moon-base/mars-forward.md: links
  • segments/foundational-exploration.md: both lunar papers, under "Areas of future work"
  • segments/human-lunar-return.md: the power paper's self-sufficient elements (open question 33)
  • the Update source page: three "queued" cells now link, plus the White Papers page confirmation
  • index.md, queue.md
• open-questions.md:
  • additions to 30 (cited papers not held; the Mars trade-space page may already be in sources/text/pages/) and 31 (lunar power paper now read)
  • new 32: the "integrated surface power element"
  • new 33: LTV and Pressurized Rover in HLR or FE
  • new 34: where the content lives; the new concept page
  • new 35: slips in the three papers

How the pages are built:

• One home per topic. The sub-architecture pages hold power and C&PNT; the element pages hold only element-specific points; planetary protection lives on the new concept page. Source pages map to the homes and don't copy them.
• No Moon Base relevance changes. None of the papers mentions the Moon Base. The notional-chart axes (kW, Mbps) are not compared with the Users Guide's "5 kW" or "> 500Mbps".
• Every link to an LD, MD or gap ID is labeled the wiki's. None of the three papers cites one.
• No values read off figures. Axis titles, ranges and "Values Notional" only.
• Reading order from the PDF wherever the text layer interleaves columns: lunar power pp. 2 and 5, planetary protection p. 4.
• Page numbers. Printed numbers match PDF pages and text markers in all three papers.

Surprising:

• The lunar power paper never names the Lunar Nuclear Fission System. It promises an "integrated surface power element" in the future tense, though the ADD says the fission system was "added" in 2025 (open question 32).
• It places the LTV and Pressurized Rover in Human Lunar Return; the ADD maps both to Foundational Exploration only (open question 33).
• "Conventional lithium-ion batteries would account for more than one-fourth of the mass of a theoretical 15-metric ton habitation asset" (lunar power, p. 5).
• The FE navigation need is 25–50 m real-time absolute, while "NASA has procured systems to realize 10-meter or better accuracy" (C&PNT, p. 4). Gap #0101's target is 10 m (3σ).
• The C&PNT paper reprints ADD p. 67's diagram, Gateway relay included, and gives its gap examples under 2024 titles.
• Planetary protection is about Mars only. "Humans on the Martian surface represent a continuous contamination source", and backward protection "would require presidential approval" under PD/NSC-25 (pp. 2–3).

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 199–230, Appendix D first half):

• Replace "The sheet does not explain the asterisk" on gap pages with the p. 199 definition (session 8 note). #1202 still carries it.
• If Appendix D's gap text names the lunar power or C&PNT white papers, or the 2024 gap titles, note it on the gap pages. Don't duplicate the white-paper bullets added here.

Later sessions:

• ACR24 technology-gaps session: check the C&PNT paper's three 2024 gap titles against #0101, #0103 and #0102 (open question 35).
• Appendix C session: check whether Appendix C describes MD-10, MD-11 or MD-12. If so, extend concepts/planetary-protection.md and key-definition-tasks.md.
• Web-pages session:
  • confirm moon-to-mars-architecture-mars-architecture-trade-space.md is the page the Update cites (open question 30)
  • write the White Papers page's source page

Session 10 — 2026-10-01 — ACR25 white papers: Architecture Definition, Why Moon and Mars

Read:

• "Architecture Definition" white paper, all 6 pages. The raw PDF was checked on all six:
  • Figures One to Four
  • Table One, which the text layer scrambles; its shading marks MD-02, 04, 05 and 07 closed
  • the key-terms table and the takeaways box
• "Why Moon and Mars? Building an Evolutionary Architecture", all 9 pages. The raw PDF was checked on pp. 1–8:
  • the p. 2 Mercury, Gemini and Apollo graphic
  • the p. 3 "Exploration Challenges by Destination" graphic
  • p. 4's interleaved columns
  • p. 7, a diagram with no text layer
• ADD Rev C, narrowly: PDF pp. 73–74, to confirm the white paper's Figures Two and Three are the ADD's two figures. They are, including "Utiliation" as printed.
• Searches:
  • sources/manifest.csv, for the papers each white paper cites or supersedes
  • the ADD, the tech-gap CSV and the Update, for MD-01 to MD-12 and for the Mars light-time figure
  • the ACR25 lunar power white paper's text, for the same figure (one line only)
• For cross-links: schema, index, log, queue, open questions; why-moon-to-mars, architecture-definition-process, key-definition-tasks; the data-gaps white paper, Update and ADD source pages; humans-to-mars, the fission element, #0902.

Created (2 pages):

• sources/2025-12-acr25-wp-architecture-definition-v3.md
• sources/2025-12-acr25-wp-why-moon-and-mars-v2.md

Each has the document facts, a contents map pointing to the concept pages, what the PDF shows that the text layer loses, the comparison with the ADD, the takeaways, references and oddities.

Updated:

• concepts/why-moon-to-mars.md, rewritten around the white paper. The ADD text is kept. New material:
  • Apollo's "crawl-walk-run approach", with the p. 2 graphic as a table
  • distance, gravity and hazards, with the p. 3 graphic and the text's qualifiers on distance
  • the four programmatic considerations, with an ADD-facet-to-heading table (the wiki's match) and the p. 7 sub-headings
  • one subsection per consideration, linked to tenets, elements and sub-architectures
  • "Not only technology"
  • hazard gaps under Related pages, labeled the wiki's pairing
• concepts/architecture-definition-process.md, a new subsection "What the 'Architecture Definition' white paper adds":
  • the six questions listed once each
  • trade space, the Apollo example, "iterative, not linear"
  • the key-terms table and the three-step roadmapping process
  • how the Mars catalog was built, and Figure Four
  • the queued footnote line replaced; "Utiliation" corrected in the session 8 table, as printed
• concepts/key-definition-tasks.md:
  • two "what a task is" bullets: the crew-versus-habitat-window example, and what an outcome can be
  • a new section with Table One (MD-01 to MD-12, shading, the ADD §3.1.3 status and the gaps citing each; cross-check labeled the wiki's)
  • three kinds of outcome; the MD-07 case study
  • a note that the paper doesn't settle MD-05
  • a sentence under the spreadsheet table
• Other pages:
  • segments/humans-to-mars.md: the MD-01 to MD-12 pointer, "nearly 100", the light-time note
  • elements/lunar-nuclear-fission-system.md: the white paper's fission sentence
  • gaps/esdmd-0902.md: a fourth bullet on the MD-07 case study
  • the Update source page: two "queued" cells now link
  • the ADD source page: two contents rows
  • index.md, queue.md
• open-questions.md:
  • additions to 12 (the case study), 21 (the guiding questions), 27 (LD/MD; the new MD titles), 28 (MD-05 neutral) and 30 (superseded and cited papers not held)
  • new 31 (Mars light-time, 24 or 22 minutes)

How the pages are built:

• One home per topic:

  • Table One, outcomes and the case study on key-definition-tasks
  • key terms, roadmapping and Figure Four on architecture-definition-process
  • the three challenges and four considerations on why-moon-to-mars

  The source pages map to those homes and don't copy them.

• Page numbers. Both papers' printed numbers match their PDF pages and text markers. Each source page says so (compare open question 29).

• The three orders of the six questions (intro list, Figure One ring, Figure Three) are not treated as a contradiction. The paper says the process is "iterative, not linear". Only the five-question takeaway went to open question 21.
• No pin counts and no distance ratios were read off figures. Apollo's "Nine Crewed Flights" against the text's "nine … plus two Earth orbit missions" is recorded as printed, without naming missions.
• The logistics (5,000–6,000 kg) and maintenance (24 hours) figures are attributed through the white paper, with the references it cites. They were not added to sub-architecture or tenet pages.

Surprising:

• Twelve Mars priority task titles in one table. The white paper's Table One gives twelve MD titles, three of them new to the wiki: MD-03 mission cadence, MD-06 crew to Mars vicinity per mission, and MD-08 loss-of-mission risk methodology. Whether it matches ADD Appendix C's list is for that session.
• Three December 2025 sources agree on what is closed: the paper's shading, ADD Section 3.1.3, and the spreadsheet's ✓.
• Each source fumbles the list of six questions differently. The ADD repeats "Where" and drops "When" (p. 73). The white paper lists all six in its introduction but only five, without "Where", in its takeaways.
• The ADD's facet "National Posture" is the paper's "American Leadership", and "will reinforce" became "will require and enable".
• NASA's own December 2025 products give two Mars light-time figures: up to 24 minutes (both white papers) and up to 22 (the Update).
• "In many cases, the capability gaps that NASA must address are not limited to technology. They also include experience and operational know-how" ("Why Moon and Mars?", p. 6).

For the next session (ACR25 white papers on NTRS: lunar power, planetary protection, FE C&PNT):

• Lunar power (ntrs-20250010948-…):
  • extend the "2025 Architecture Update" section on sub-architectures/power-systems.md and the fission element
  • its "4 to 24 minutes" line is already in open question 31
  • LD-101 (lunar external power augmentation) may be explained there
• Planetary protection (ntrs-20250010949-…): MD-10 and MD-11 are open priority tasks (Table One). Link them from key-definition-tasks, and from #1202 and #0304.
• FE C&PNT (ntrs-20250010953-…): extend the C&PNT sub-architecture and SCaN pages; compare with LD-103 and MD-12.
• Appendix C session:
  • compare ADD Appendix C's MD-01 to MD-12 (near p. 194) with Table One, especially the titles of MD-01 and MD-07
  • check whether Appendix C describes MD-03, MD-06 and MD-08
• Appendix A session (pp. 105–108): why-moon-to-mars.md now has a "Where to read more" pointing to it. Extend the page; don't add a parallel one.

Session 9 — 2026-10-01 — 2025 Architecture Update

Read:

• The 2025 Architecture Update, all 20 pages. Raw PDF checked on:
  • pp. 1–2 (cover, contents) and pp. 4–6 (rover rendering, rover page, fission rendering)
  • p. 9 (the three-column infrastructure feature)
  • p. 11 (data-gap figure and table, scrambled in the text layer)
  • p. 13 (two interleaved columns)
  • p. 14 (the "RECHARACTERIZED" stamp on #0602)
  • p. 15 (the standards badges and adoption years, images only)
  • p. 16 (the radar chart) and p. 19 (photo)
• ADD Rev C, narrowly, to check the Update:
  • B.3.8.1 (p. 158) and B.3.11.1 (p. 160): the two new elements' functions; they match
  • MD-05 on p. 76 and in Appendix C (p. 193)
  • the #0602 note under the D.2 list (p. 202)
  • a search for "nine" standards (p. 99, already on RT-7)
• Searches and checks:
  • the tech-gap CSV for the nine function IDs: only FN-A-302 L appears (#1002, #1004, #1005)
  • sources/ for "Logistics and Mobility" (no white paper by that title)
  • page 1 of the five other 2025 white papers and the ACR24 mobility paper, for their titles
  • the data-gaps white paper text, for "In situ"
• For cross-links: schema, index, log, queue, open questions; both element pages; key-definition-tasks; humans-to-mars; gaps 0504, 0505 and the gaps index; the data-gaps index and DN-006/007/008/010/013 L; RT-7 and RT-9; architecture-definition-process; the Power, C&PNT and Logistics sub-architecture pages; phase-1-functional-gaps; the elements index; the ADD, data-gaps white paper and Users Guide source pages.

Created (1 page): sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-update-for-publication.md. It covers:

• a page-number note and a contents table with PDF and printed numbers
• the p. 3 "contracted baseline" caveat
• one section per feature or update
• the six 2025 white papers matched to their files
• the 2026 look-ahead, what to know, oddities, and an extraction note

Updated:

• Elements. lunar-utility-rover.md and lunar-nuclear-fission-system.md each gained a section "The 2025 Architecture Update" with:

  • how the description differs from the ADD's
  • the rover's rationale
  • the function table, with a column for Phase 1 functional gaps
  • Moon Base relevance by shared function ID, labeled the wiki's join

  The rover's Moon Base relevance still opens "Not established by the sources so far", with the labeled join beneath it. elements/index.md gained:

  • the function-ID join as a new kind of link in "Moon Base links at a glance" (rover row added)
  • the rover's cross-sub-architecture functions
  • the Update's name split for the fission element

• Key definition tasks. New subsection on MD-05: the ADD and the Update side by side (four; "no fewer than six" against "up to six"), the reasoning, and what stays open. The "three new results" note now says the Update doesn't settle it. segments/humans-to-mars.md gained the crew reasoning and the 2026 Mars focus.

• Tech gaps. gaps/esdmd-0504.md and esdmd-0505.md now say "New in Rev C" in the summary and in Description. gaps/index.md:
  • "How the list changes" now has "What changed in Rev C" (Update p. 14, ADD p. 202)
  • "There is no #0602" now says why
• Data gaps. data-gaps/index.md: two key facts (the #0602 replacement; the Update's summary). DN-006, 007, 008, 010 and 013 L: a Traceability bullet "Former technology gap".
• Concepts:
  • rt-7-interoperability.md: new "Standards adopted, by year" (the 4 + 5 badges; the match to the ADD's "nine" labeled the wiki's)
  • rt-9-commerce-and-space-development.md: new section with the lunar-economy paragraph
  • architecture-definition-process.md: what else a review produces (the Update, white papers, caveat, 2026 focus); new section "Measuring the architecture: performance and effectiveness" with the radar chart's axes, no values read
• Sub-architectures. Power, C&PNT and Logistics each gained "The 2025 Architecture Update", quoting the feature's column.
• Other pages:
  • moon-base/phase-1-functional-gaps.md: one pointer paragraph, no new section
  • sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md: "What to know" (the companion and its caveat; the MD-05 split); contents rows note pp. 158, 160, 193, 202
  • sources/2025-12-acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.md: the Update repeats Figure One and Table Two
  • index.md, queue.md
• open-questions.md:
  • additions to 11 (sixth kind of wiki-made link: function-ID joins), 21 (Update doesn't settle "three new results") and 22 (Update p. 18's Artemis III landing; the caveat)
  • new 28 (MD-05 contradiction), 29 (PDF or printed page numbers) and 30 (linked material not in sources)

How the pages are built:

• PDF page numbers throughout for the Update. They match the text file's markers. Printed numbers are one lower (open question 29).
• Link label "2025 Architecture Update, p. N" everywhere. Sections that mix sources say whose page numbers they use.
• The function-ID join is labeled the wiki's on every page that uses it, with the Users Guide's two-part definition of a functional gap and no guess at which part applies. It wasn't extended to the other 13 elements, whose Appendix B.3 mappings are unread.
• No derived Rev B gap count from "adds two, removes one".
• No new concept page. The infrastructure feature lives on the source page plus one quote each on the three sub-architecture pages and RT-9.
• White-paper title matches are labeled the wiki's. Two titles differ slightly from their files.

Surprising:

• The ADD and its companion disagree on the Mars crew number. Same month, same decision (MD-05). The ADD twice considers "no fewer than six"; the Update twice says "up to six" and that the maximum is not formally constrained (open question 28).
• NASA flagged pending changes in Dec 2025. "While conversations continue about potential changes in implementation, the products represent the contracted baseline" (Update, p. 3). That was about two months before the Artemis plan announced in February 2026.
• #0602 was "recharacterized" into five data gaps (DN-006, 007, 008, 010, 013 L), a live example of the tech-to-data-gap swap the ADD describes on p. 79.
• Most functions of the two new elements are Moon Base Phase 1 functional gaps: four of the rover's six and all three of the fission system's. The Users Guide doesn't say whether these count as "unallocated" or as needing "additional performance".
• The standards count matches. The Update shows nine badges (Communications 2024; Avionics, Software, Power 2025; five Gateway standards). The ADD says "nine International Deep Space Interoperability Standards exist" (p. 99).
• The Update cites a 2024 white paper, "Lunar Logistics and Mobility", that isn't among the sources under that title.

For the next session (ACR25 white papers: architecture definition, why Moon and Mars):

• The "Architecture Definition" white paper "summarize[s] the six major questions" (Update, p. 17). Check it against the ADD's guiding questions on p. 73, where "Where" appears twice and "When" is missing (open question 21). Extend the roadmapping section of concepts/architecture-definition-process.md, as the session 8 log asked.
• "Why Moon and Mars? Building an Evolutionary Architecture": extend concepts/why-moon-to-mars.md, don't duplicate it. The Update summarizes it as a "crawl-walk-run approach" (p. 17).
• Later sessions:
  • The lunar power and C&PNT white papers (next-but-one session) can extend the "2025 Architecture Update" sections on the Power and C&PNT pages.
  • The Appendix B session should check all element function mappings against the Phase 1 functional gaps, if the project lead keeps open question 11's function-ID join.
  • The Appendix C session needn't reread MD-05 for open question 28. Its whole entry is on p. 193 and was read here. It ends at "architecture feasibility" without a period, and p. 194 opens with C.2.3.

Session 8 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 71–104: architecture evolution, definition tasks, gap prioritization, recurring tenets

Read:

• ADD Rev C, pp. 70–105, in full. Raw PDF checked on:
  • pp. 73–74 (the two roadmapping figures) and p. 78 (gap-prioritization figure and formula)
  • pp. 80–81 (data-gap figure; "figures below" but only one) and p. 83 (tenet table with icons)
  • p. 103 (RT-9's nested bullets) and p. 104 (Appendix A divider)
• Appendix D, narrowly, to settle what the rating means:
  • D.1 (p. 199): the rating and bin definitions and the * definition
  • the start of D.2 (p. 200, PDF checked: its table has only "Priority Rating" and "Priority Bin", no score column)
  • the ✓ legend, found by a search and checked on the PDF at p. 204 (it is printed on all 57 gap tables)
• Searches:
  • the tech-gap CSV, for all definition-task IDs and ✓ marks
  • the data-gap CSV, for SLE
  • the whole ADD text, for LD/MD acronyms (none) and for "highest/lowest/bin"
  • all of sources/, for "tenet" (no Moon Base source mentions it)
  • the March 2026 fact sheet, for cadence and Gateway
• For cross-links: open-questions, the ADD, tech-gap and ACR25 white-paper source pages, gaps and data-gaps indexes, elements index, the segment pages, objectives, and architecture-definition-process.

Created (11 pages):

• concepts/key-definition-tasks.md, from Section 3.1.3:
  • the seven legacy decisions and seven completed tasks
  • a table of the nine tasks the gap spreadsheet cites, with ✓ explained
  • changes since Rev C (LD-02-L, LD-04-L, LD-05-L)
• concepts/recurring-tenets.md (hub) and nine tenet pages, concepts/rt-1-international-collaboration.md to concepts/rt-9-commerce-and-space-development.md

Updated:

• All 57 gap pages:
  • "Priority" now says what the rating means, in one standard sentence linking to the method
  • the ADD added to frontmatter and to Sources
  • the page-specific sentences on 1102, 0803, 0501, 0504, 0606, 0502 and 0902 kept
  • on the six pages with a ✓ (0103, 0301, 1101, 0701, 0806, 0902), what ✓ means and the decision itself
  • on #0902, MD-07's 2024 ACR date
• gaps/index.md: new sections "What a technology gap is", "How NASA prioritizes the gaps" (the four metrics, the p. 78 figure, rank versus score), "Why no gap lists Human Lunar Return", "How the list changes".
• sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-driven-technology-gaps.md: priority section rewritten; both markers explained.
• data-gaps/index.md: new section "What the ADD says a data gap is (Section 3.3)"; key facts (not ranked, "even partially addressing … is valuable", tech/data gaps can swap).
• sources/2025-12-acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.md: its Figure One is the ADD's p. 80 figure.
• elements/index.md: "How a new element gets in" (Section 3.4).
• concepts/architecture-definition-process.md: Section 3 map, unique considerations by destination, roadmapping with both figures as a table.
• Segments: segments/index.md, human-lunar-return.md, sustained-lunar-evolution.md and humans-to-mars.md. They now say why HLR has no tech gaps (p. 79) and that no data gap lists SLE despite p. 81, and they give the tenet mentions and the Mars tasks.
• sub-architectures/in-situ-resource-utilization-systems.md and moon-base/priorities.md: what the rating means (the ISRU page had a stale sentence).
• objectives/index.md: tenet table replaced by a link to the hub.
• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md: contents rows pp. 71–104; slips; extraction notes.
• index.md, queue.md
• open-questions.md: 12 (markers) and 13 resolved; additions to 11, 21, 22; new 26 (tenet pages) and 27 (definition-tasks page).

How the pages are built:

• One home per topic:
  • the gap method on gaps/index.md; gap pages carry one sentence each
  • the data-gap definition on data-gaps/index.md
  • pre-formulation on elements/index.md
  • tenet wording on the tenet hub
• Appendix D was used only for definitions (p. 199 rating, bin and *; p. 204 ✓) and the start of D.2. The catalog itself remains the Appendix D session's.
• Wiki-made links are labeled. Tenet pages pair tenet topics with gaps under "Related pages", marked "the pairing is the wiki's" (open question 11). Concept pages have no Moon Base relevance section.
• Changes since Rev C quote, don't infer. No newer source mentions a definition task. The Gateway, NRHO and cadence items are reported side by side, not called reversed.

Surprising:

• The published rating is a rank, not a score. NASA weights criticality, urgency, breadth and depth through an "Analytical Hierarchy Process", but publishes neither the weights nor the scores. Cost is deliberately left out.
• HLR has no tech gaps by design. Its technology is "development and investment by the current programs" (p. 79).
• The ADD says the data gaps "span all architecture segments" (p. 81), but none lists SLE.
• The ✓ marker was defined all along, in a legend on every Appendix D gap table. It matches Section 3.1.3 exactly: four ticked tasks are decided, five unticked ones are not.
• "Even partially addressing the defined data gap is valuable" (p. 81), and data gaps "do not set requirements".
• MD-07 (Mars fission) was decided at the 2024 ACR, a year before the Dec 2025 spreadsheet that still lists solar and fuel-cell children under #0902.
• RT-5 calls robotic or automated maintenance "an architecture gap that needs additional development" (p. 93). RT-9 asks "when and how to purchase data to close knowledge gaps versus soliciting entire missions" (p. 103).
• Section 3 still carries the pre-2026 plan: Artemis III landing (p. 90), Gateway and NRHO as legacy decisions, and an "annual cadence" against the fact sheet's "semi-annual" (open question 22).

For the next session (2025 Architecture Update):

• The update may restate the tenets, the definition tasks, or the "three new results" (open question 21: MD-02, MD-04, MD-05, or with LD-103). Check, and extend concepts/key-definition-tasks.md rather than duplicating it.
• If it says anything about how gaps are rated, add it to gaps/index.md#how-nasa-prioritizes-the-gaps, not to the 57 gap pages.
• Later sessions:
  • The Appendix C session (pp. 186–198) should extend concepts/key-definition-tasks.md with the open tasks and the spreadsheet's ID-less tasks (open question 27). A search shows Appendix C lists MD-01 to MD-12 (text lines near p. 194); which are open wasn't read.
  • The Appendix D session should replace the 13 gap pages' "The sheet does not explain the asterisk" with the p. 199 definition. It should also use D.1's note that "A gap's urgency score is partly based on the first segment for which the capability is needed" (p. 199), and then the Segments note on segments/index.md that "The tech-gap sheet doesn't define its column" can cite it.
  • The ACR25 "architecture definition" white paper session can extend the roadmapping section of concepts/architecture-definition-process.md (p. 74 points to it).

Session 7 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 47–70: the elements

Read:

• ADD Rev C, pp. 47–71, in full. Raw PDF checked on:
  • p. 47 (one-pager layout), p. 51 (Gateway components and partner boxes), p. 54 (the airlock)
  • p. 63 (Pressurized Rover's JAXA box), p. 67 (the C&PNT links figure)
  • p. 68 (SLS mapping box), p. 69 (Section 2.4), p. 70 (divider), p. 71
• Appendix B headings only (a grep), to settle the SLS mapping number: "B.3.15 Space Launch System" is on p. 165.
• Moon Base sources, for each element's Moon Base relevance:
  • Users Guide pp. 2, 4, 6, 8–11, 14–15
  • Moon Base Phases page (all mission sections)
  • encyclopedia "History" and "Did You Know?"
  • the Aug 2026 update ("Blue Origin", "Northrop Grumman")
  • Lunar Surface Technology ("Fission Surface Power")
  • CAPSTONE 02 article; wheel-challenge article
  • March 2026 fact sheet
• Both gap spreadsheets, searched for every element name and acronym, for "Gaps that mention it".

Created (15 pages): one per element under elements/, using session 6's slugs unchanged: commercial-lunar-payload-services, exploration-eva-system, exploration-ground-systems, gateway (seven components as subsections, including the Gateway Logistics Element), human-landing-system, human-class-delivery-lander, initial-surface-habitat, lunar-nuclear-fission-system, lunar-surface-cargo-lander, lunar-terrain-vehicle, lunar-utility-rover, orion-spacecraft, pressurized-rover, space-communications-and-navigation-networks (pp. 64–67, with the p. 67 figure), space-launch-system.

Updated:

• elements/index.md, rewritten. New sections: who implements each element, Moon Base links at a glance, Section 2.4 utilization payloads and equipment, changes since Rev C. Also a confirmation that all 15 one-pagers' segment and sub-architecture labels match session 6's tables, and the SLS mapping slip.
• Segments: segments/index.md, human-lunar-return.md, foundational-exploration.md. Element names now link; changes since Rev C point to element pages.
• Sub-architectures: the seven that have elements, plus utilization-systems.md (Section 2.4 now read). The C&PNT page points to the SCaN element page instead of copying it.
• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md: contents rows for pp. 47–70, Gateway's section, more slips, extraction notes on the one-pagers, the p. 67 figure and p. 70.
• moon-base/missions-and-assets.md: new section "How these relate to ADD elements", labeled link by link.
• Gap pages: gaps/esdmd-0901.md and esdmd-0803.md gained related-page links to elements. esdmd-0902.md also gained the ADD as a third source on whether Mars fission is already selected (yes, stated in Dec 2025, p. 58).
• concepts/architecture-framework.md: stale "queued" line.
• index.md (15 element rows; ADD section intro), queue.md
• open-questions.md: additions to 11, 12, 21 and 22; new 24 (element-page sections) and 25 (SLS upper stage and mobile launcher).

How the pages are built:

• Sections. Proposed for SCHEMA as open question 24. "NASA's description" quotes each one-pager's Element Description in full. "At a glance" gives the implementing program with the italic line "printed beneath" it, unlabeled, because the ADD doesn't label it. Header-image captions are quoted because some carry facts.
• "Gaps that mention it" lists only rows whose text names the element. Same-subject gaps that don't name it are marked as the wiki's pairing.
• Moon Base relevance in three kinds (open question 11):
  • The source names the element: CLPS, the Initial Surface Habitat (Users Guide p. 6), and Gateway's PPE and HALO hardware.
  • The wiki matches by name or wording: the LTV (Phase One), the Pressurized Rover (Phase Two), Lunar Reactor-1 as the fission element, and Altus-1's NSN contract.
  • Same subject, not matched: "small utility rovers" against the Lunar Utility Rover, the 2 t landers, the RTG and 5 kW power targets.
  • Every page that shows an FE-only element in a Moon Base phase says this is not a segment-to-phase mapping.
• Changes since Rev C quote newer sources and don't infer. Gateway's absence from the updated Artemis plan is reported as an omission, not a cancellation.

Surprising:

• Gateway is the most changed element. Rev C gives it five pages, two configurations, seven components and four partner agencies. Since then its PPE has gone to SR-1 Freedom and its HALO power and avionics hardware to Moon Base surface demonstrations, "following NASA's shift from an orbital-focused lunar strategy to one centered on surface operations" (Aug 2026 update). The PPE's propulsion was billed in Rev C as a solar electric demonstration for Mars; SR-1 is a nuclear electric one.
• Two programs carry eight elements. The Human Landing System Program also implements the HDL, the Initial Surface Habitat and the Lunar Surface Cargo Lander. EVA and Human Surface Mobility implements the suit and all three rovers. CLPS sits under the Science Mission Directorate, and the fission system is printed with Glenn Research Center, not a program office.
• The ADD already stated the Mars fission decision in Dec 2025 (p. 58), the same month the tech-gap spreadsheet still carried solar and fuel-cell children under #0902 (open question 12).
• Moon Base pages copy ADD wording. The LTV and Pressurized Rover sections of the Moon Base Phases page repeat the one-pagers nearly word for word, without citing the ADD.
• More slips (open question 21):
  • The SLS one-pager prints mapping B.3.14, SCaN's number; B.3.15 is right (p. 165).
  • p. 64 repeats the dangling "Section 2.2.2".
  • "Mohammad" against "Mohammed" (p. 54).
• p. 70 is a divider, the Section 3 cover. Its text layer carries a hidden "Architecture Components … Utilization Payloads and Equipment" header that the rendered page doesn't show.
• The p. 67 C&PNT figure lists "HLS Providers" among ground stations and still shows Gateway as a relay.

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 71–104):

• Section 3.2 (p. 77) explains how tech gaps are prioritized. Update the "Priority" section of all 57 gap pages with what the bin and rating mean (open question 13), and the gaps index and the tech-gap source page.
• Section 3.1 (pp. 72–74) has the key definition tasks. It may identify the Executive Summary's "three new results" (open question 21) and the ✓ marks (open question 12).
• Section 3.4 (p. 82), element definition and pre-formulation: link it from elements/index.md#what-makes-something-an-element.
• Section 3.5 recurring tenets (pp. 83–104): objectives/index.md has the nine tenet names. Decide where tenet assessments go (concepts/ per SCHEMA), and log it in open questions if unclear.
• Forward link left: sources/2024-12-acr24-lunar-reference-frames.md, from the SCaN page (its ACR24 session is queued).

Session 6 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 21–46: segments, sub-architectures, elements overview

Read:

• ADD Rev C text pp. 20–46 in full. Raw PDF checked for pp. 22–23 (the segment boxes and their icons), p. 26 (HLR element table), pp. 31–32 (FE element table), p. 40 (sub-architecture table and icons) and pp. 45–46 (Section 2.3 table, icon-only columns).
• ADD contents (pp. 5–7) for element section numbers and the Appendix B.3 numbering; the Section 2.3.x headings only (one line each, pp. 47–59) to fix element slugs.
• Users Guide p. 9 (grouping "by associated sub-architecture"). A search of its extracted text finds no "segment"; the text layer spaces out some headings, so this is a text-layer result.
• Tech-gap CSV: segment and sub-architecture columns, to check the counts derived from the gaps index (FE 32, SLE 46, H2M 44; sub-architecture totals 90).
• For cross-links: open-questions, the ADD source page, architecture-framework, objectives, gaps and data-gap indexes, phase-1-functional-gaps, mars-forward, the March 2026 fact sheet's source page.

Created (18 pages):

• segments/index.md and the four segment pages (human-lunar-return, foundational-exploration, sustained-lunar-evolution, humans-to-mars)
• sub-architectures/index.md and 12 sub-architecture pages, using session 2's slugs unchanged
• elements/index.md: Section 2.3's overview (pp. 45–46) and the p. 21 key terms. No element pages.

Updated:

• index.md (three new sub-sections), queue.md
• concepts/architecture-framework.md: its "not read yet" and "next session" lines replaced with summaries and links
• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md: contents rows for pp. 21–46; "What to know" now records the Artemis III and Gateway contradiction; the element-table disagreements; an extraction note on icon-only columns
• moon-base/phase-1-functional-gaps.md: ID-format paragraph rewritten; the summary table links each group to its sub-architecture page
• moon-base/index.md: one sentence linking segments, elements and sub-architectures
• open-questions.md: 7 and 15 resolved, 8 partly answered, additions to 21, new 22–23

How the pages are built:

• Section lists for segment and sub-architecture pages are in open question 23. Each sub-architecture page quotes NASA's description in full.
• One home per definition. The p. 21 terms Element, Exploration Asset, and Utilization Payloads and Equipment, plus the utilization footnote, live on elements/index.md. Segment and Sub-Architecture stay on architecture-framework (p. 21 repeats p. 18 word for word).
• Derived counts. Gap counts by segment and by sub-architecture are read off the spreadsheets and labeled as derived. MB flags come from the gaps index.
• Objective codes are quoted as printed ("LPS-1", "HS-2", "TH-04-M") and not normalized to the data-gap format. Goal prefixes link to objectives/index.md.
• H2M, not "HM", on new pages, as in the ADD acronym list.
• Moon Base.
  • Segment pages say "Not established by the sources so far": no source maps a segment to a phase.
  • Sub-architecture pages have a "Moon Base Phase 1" section, because the Users Guide itself groups Phase 1 functional gaps by sub-architecture (p. 9). That link is the source's.

New slugs (forward links; the elements session should reuse them): from the Section 2.3 headings: elements/commercial-lunar-payload-services, exploration-eva-system (singular, per the heading), exploration-ground-systems, gateway, human-landing-system, human-class-delivery-lander, initial-surface-habitat, lunar-nuclear-fission-system, lunar-surface-cargo-lander, lunar-terrain-vehicle, lunar-utility-rover, orion-spacecraft, pressurized-rover, space-communications-and-navigation-networks, space-launch-system. The Gateway Logistics Element (Section 2.3.4.1.4) has no slug of its own; it links to gateway. These are linked only from elements/index.md.

Surprising:

• The ADD still has Artemis III landing crew (p. 24); the March 2026 fact sheet moved the landing to Artemis IV (open question 22). Three of the nine lunar reference missions involve Gateway or NRHO.
• The function-ID letter is the sub-architecture (p. 40), and the Users Guide's seven groups are ADD sub-architectures by its own words (p. 9). But the guide files six functions under a group with a different letter.
• Five sub-architectures have no element: Autonomous Systems and Robotics, Data, Human Systems, ISRU and Utilization. Autonomy is the sub-architecture listed most often by tech gaps (13), and ISRU has the highest share of Moon Base gaps (5 of 7).
• The element tables disagree. The Section 2.3 table (pp. 45–46) leaves out the new Lunar Nuclear Fission System and is numbered one off from 2.3.8. The FE table calls it "Lunar Nuclear Power System" (open question 21).
• Only HLR and FE have elements. SLE has no functions, reference missions or elements yet ("insufficient depth", p. 33), but 46 of 57 tech gaps list it. HLR is the reverse: no tech gaps, 17 data gaps.
• 17 of the 19 Moon Base tech gaps list FE; the other two are #1001 and #0605.

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 47–70, the elements):

• Create the element pages under the slugs above, and turn elements/index.md's forward links into real ones. The segment and sub-architecture pages list elements as plain text, so they can link them too.
• Gateway (pp. 50–54): record what Rev C's section says and the Users Guide's PPE repurposing (p. 2). Check whether it explains "Crew-Capable Configuration" and the Gateway Logistics Element (2.3.4.1.4).
• Lunar Nuclear Fission System (p. 58): new in Rev C. Compare with the Moon Base pages' fission material, if any, and the #0901 and #0902 gap pages.
• Moon Base relevance on element pages: the Users Guide doesn't name ADD elements, as far as sessions 1 and 6 saw. Only record a link where a source makes it. For example, moon-base/missions-and-assets.md lists LTVs among Phase 1 missions; check that page's source before tying it to the ADD's Lunar Terrain Vehicle element.
• Section 2.4 (pp. 69–70) defines utilization payloads and equipment; link from elements/index.md#key-terms and sub-architectures/utilization-systems.md.

Session 5 — 2026-10-01 — ADD Rev C pp. 1–20: revision notes, executive summary, architecture foundations

Read:

• ADD Rev C text pp. 1–20, in full
• the raw PDF for pp. 3–10 (revision table and contents, whose cells the text layer splits; the Executive Summary; a divider), pp. 12–17 (the "not a …" table, the four facets, the goals table, the p. 16 figure) and pp. 19–20 (the p. 19 figure)
• ADD acronym entries on pp. 291–293, for the ten goal codes and RT
• the March 2026 fact sheet, pp. 1–2 (old and new Artemis plans), for the source page's "what to know" note
• for cross-links: the Users Guide source page, the Moon Base hub, missions-and-assets, the data gaps index and the two spreadsheet source pages

Created:

• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md, the ADD source page that session 4 forward-linked. It has identity and date, the "not a manifest / procurement direction / budget request / policy document" table (p. 13), the revision history (pp. 3–4), contents by page with wiki coverage, changes since release, and an extraction note.
• concepts/objective-decomposition.md: architect from the right; key terms (p. 17); the steps; the p. 16 figure; where Appendix B and the decomposition spreadsheets are
• concepts/architecture-framework.md: what "architecture" means; why NASA rejects a fixed up-front design; segment and sub-architecture definitions (p. 18); the four segments by name
• concepts/architecture-definition-process.md: the annual strategic analysis cycle and the ACR; the p. 19 figure; revisions to date; "architecture decisions" renamed "architecture definition"
• concepts/why-moon-to-mars.md: Section 1.3.1 and the four facets
• objectives/index.md: the ten goals in NASA's wording, the nine recurring tenets by name, and which goal prefixes the data gaps use

Updated:

• index.md (new section "The architecture (ADD Rev C)" and an ADD source row), queue.md
• open-questions.md: additions to 8, 15 and 19; new 21
• data-gaps/index.md: a one-line pointer from the objective table to the goals page. The 25 data-gap pages were not edited (open question 19 leaves that to the objectives session).
• links to the new ADD page from the tech-gap spreadsheet source page, the ACR25 data-gaps white paper source page, the Users Guide source page (with a by-title match of its unnamed appendices to ADD B.5, D and E, labeled as the wiki's) and the Moon Base hub

How the pages are built:

• One home per definition. NASA's key terms sit on one page each: characteristics and needs, use cases and functions on objective decomposition; architecture, segments and sub-architecture on architecture framework. Other pages link to them. glossary.md is left for the Appendix F session.
• Nothing past p. 20. Section 2 is only named, from the contents. No segments/, sub-architectures/ or elements/ pages were made.
• Figures on pp. 16 and 19 are described from the PDF in labeled tables or lists, quoting the figure text.

New slugs (reuse them):

• concepts/objective-decomposition (Appendix B use cases and functions can extend it)
• concepts/architecture-framework (the segment and sub-architecture sessions can link here)
• concepts/architecture-definition-process (Section 3.1 and Appendix C can extend it)
• concepts/why-moon-to-mars (Appendix A and the "Why Moon and Mars" white paper)
• objectives/index (goals now; the objectives session can extend or split it)
• forward links: all four segments/ slugs, from architecture-framework

Surprising:

• The ADD says plainly what it is not: "not procurement direction", "not a manifest", "not a budget request". "Architecture products communicate needs; they do not presuppose solutions" (p. 13). It "reflects the approved baseline for programs of record" (pp. 9, 13).
• Tech gaps date from Rev B (Dec 2024); data gaps are new in Rev C.
• The ADD has slips (open question 21): Lunar Infrastructure is labeled "(LS)" on p. 16 but LI everywhere else; p. 16 sends readers to "Section 3.4" for the recurring tenets, which are 3.5; and the Executive Summary sentence "three new results that will shape the future of results" is garbled.
• The p. 16 figure labels use cases "Segments" and functions "Sub-architectures". This may bear on what the letter in function IDs means (open question 8).

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 21–46):

• Artemis III. Check whether the Human Lunar Return segment (pp. 24–26) names Artemis III as the first landing. The March 2026 fact sheet moved the landing to Artemis IV (ADD source page). If it does, record the contradiction (newer source wins) in open-questions.
• Gateway has an element section (p. 50) though the Users Guide reports Gateway hardware being repurposed. That is for the elements session (pp. 47–70), but segment text may mention it too.
• Sub-architecture slugs. Reconcile session 2's slugs with the ADD's names on pp. 40–44, in one pass (open question 15). Rev A's history says "Infrastructure" and "Robotics".
• The Users Guide's seven headings against the ADD sub-architectures (open question 7).
• Function-ID letters against sub-architecture names (open question 8).
• Segment pages should say segments are not Moon Base phases (SCHEMA) and link back to Architecture framework.

Session 4 — 2026-10-01 — Data gaps spreadsheet and the ACR25 data-gaps white paper

Read:

• the whole data-gap workbook: both extracted sheets, rev-c-data-gaps.csv (25 rows) and key.csv (column definitions)
• the whole white paper (4 pages); pp. 1–3 also checked against the raw PDF for Figures One and Two and Table Two, which the text layer scrambles
• Users Guide pp. 11–13 again; raw PDF pp. 12–13 checked to confirm the session 1 data-gap mapping (below)
• ADD Rev C, only the acronym list, pp. 292–293, for the segment codes HLR, FE, H2M and SLE
• Moon Base Phases web page (Blue Moon MK1, Griffin-1, IM-3, VIPER, MoonFall sections) and the Lunar Surface Technology page (SCALPSS), for the mission table

Created:

• source pages sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-driven-data-gaps.md and sources/2025-12-acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.md
• 25 data-gap pages: data-gaps/dn-001-l.md to dn-019-l.md and dn-001-m.md to dn-006-m.md
• data-gaps/index.md: all 25 in one table; counts by need driver, data type and segment; challenge-by-challenge table; Phase 1 mission table (the wiki's matching, labeled); objective reverse index; lunar–Mars counterparts

Updated:

• index.md (new "Data gaps" section, two source rows), queue.md
• moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md: stale forward-link text replaced; it now answers the "complete lunar list?" question and records the text-layer quirk
• moon-base/environment.md: data-gap pointers under lighting, terrain, volatiles and dust, plus a new section "Radiation, plasma, meteoroids and quakes"
• moon-base/priorities.md: the data gaps are unranked, and the guide cites every lunar one
• open-questions.md: additions to 11, 15 and 17; new 18–20

How the pages are built:

• Sections follow the spreadsheet's columns (open question 18). All cell text is quoted in full, as in the tech-gap pages.
• Moon Base relevance comes from the reverse index on the challenges page, which was re-checked against the PDF.
  • A headline knowledge challenge has two sentences above one block of DN IDs, and the guide doesn't say which sentence each gap serves. So every page quotes both sentences.
  • Tech gaps from a headline challenge are labeled as its "technology half".
  • Mars pages say "Not established by the sources so far."
• Segments. Every page quotes the Key's definition, "during which the data is needed, but not necessarily when it is collected", and says a segment is not a Moon Base phase.
• Phase 1 missions. Mission matches (SCALPSS, LDES, VIPER, MoonFall) are the wiki's own. They sit in one labeled table on the index, with a short labeled note on each affected page (open question 11). CAPSTONE 02 (orbit, not surface) and METAL are deliberately not matched.
• Quotations from Users Guide p. 13 use the rendered form ("in depth", "dust tolerant", "survive the night"), to match the challenges page. Session 3's log said its pages used hyphens, but they are mixed (#0505 rendered, #0605 hyphenated), and the text layer reads "indepth". Open question 17 has the details; left for the lint pass.

Surprising:

• Every lunar data gap is named for Moon Base Phase 1. The spreadsheet's lunar rows are exactly DN-001 L to DN-019 L, and the Users Guide cites all 19. For tech gaps it is 19 of 57.
• No priority at all. The data gaps have no bin or rating. The white paper calls the list both "high priority, near-term" and "not … prioritized": high-priority as a set, unranked within it.
• HLR dominates. 17 of 25 data gaps are needed in the Human Lunar Return segment, which no tech gap lists. None is SLE.
• Most data is wanted from the surface. 19 of 25 are in situ (measurement, sample return or monitoring). The six remote-sensing and imagery gaps are all lunar.
• DN-001 L and DN-002 L say more data is "not required" to land a nominal mission, yet the guide cites them under the landing challenge. The spreadsheet calls the data "desirable" for design margins, especially winter power. The pages say so; it isn't a contradiction.
• Dust and electrostatics are everywhere. DN-009 L and DN-019 L are each cited under six challenges. Every power, connection and mating challenge cites at least one of them.
• Text-layer trap. On Users Guide p. 12, the second row of "Securing sites" (DN-009 L, DN-010 L, DN-013 L, DN-014 L) extracts after the long-duration list. Session 1 had it right.
• The white paper's reference 1 links the ADD Rev B file although the text is about Rev C.

For the next session (ADD Rev C pp. 1–20):

• sources/2025-12-add-revision-c-20251211.md doesn't exist yet. Session 4 forward-links it for the acronyms on pp. 292–293. The ADD source page should state date and version.
• New forward-link slug: segments/human-lunar-return.md (open question 15).
• The ADD's Appendix E (pp. 262–290) holds the same data-gap records; the white paper's Figure Three shows DN-001 L as p. 265. That later session should check the DN-015 L mass range (open question 20) and anything the spreadsheet drops.
• Objective codes on data-gap pages are unlinked (open question 19).

Session 3 — 2026-10-01 — Technology gaps spreadsheet, gaps rated 30–57, and gaps index

Read:

• the whole tech-gap CSV again (57 rows). All 57 bins and ratings were checked against the CSV for the index.
• Users Guide text pp. 8–15. The raw PDF pp. 8–9 were checked because of a page-number question (below).
• Moon Base web pages, for IPEx and CaRD (Lunar Surface Technology, landing page) and for the solicitation areas (Moon Base Solicitations)
• for cross-links, the session 1–2 pages: technology-and-knowledge-challenges, phase-1-functional-gaps, mars-forward, surface-technology, and gap pages #0903, #1104, #0305 and #1005

Created:

• 28 gap pages, gaps/esdmd-NNNN.md, for ratings 30–57 (bins 3–6). All 57 gaps now have a page.
• gaps/index.md: all 57 by rating, with derived destination, segments, sub-architectures and the Moon Base flag; a summary by bin; a list by ID group

Updated:

• index.md (28 rows plus the gaps-index row), queue.md
• the spreadsheet source page ("Gap pages" section)
• moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md (forward-link note)
• open-questions.md (additions to 4, 11 and 12; new 16 and 17)
• page-number fixes: #0301, #0303, #0305, #0702, #0804 and moon-base/phase-1-functional-gaps.md

Page-number fixes. Two errors in sessions 1–2, both checked against the raw PDF and fixed on the six pages listed above:

• Habitation, p. 8 → p. 9. Sessions 1–2 cited p. 8 for the habitation capability targets and for FN-H-102 L, FN-H-201 L and FN-L-301 L. They are on p. 9. Only the "Habitation Systems" heading and its one-line description are on p. 8.
• Mobility, p. 9 → p. 10. #0804 cited p. 9 for FN-M-304 L. The four mobility functions are on p. 10; the mobility heading, value and targets are on p. 9.

The robotics and comms items (p. 8) and the logistics items (p. 9) were already right.

How the pages are built. The session 2 pattern (copy from gaps/esdmd-0903.md or gaps/esdmd-1005.md) is used, with these additions:

• Moon Base relevance for the five gaps the Users Guide names (#0504, #0601, #0603, #0604, #0605) quotes the challenge and lists the other gaps cited with it.
• Topical notes. Following the #0305 precedent, Moon Base relevance quotes passages on the same subject, each labeled as not citing the gap. They come from Phase 1 capability targets, associated challenges that cite other gaps, Mars-forward areas and Moon Base solicitation areas. The full inventory, gap by gap, is in open question 11.
• Function cross-references under Traceability: FN-A-201 L (#0501), FN-X-103 L (#0401–#0405), FN-A-302 L (#1002, #1004), FN-H-102 L (#0306).
• Project links. Only projects the spreadsheet itself names are linked: CaRD (#0601) and IPEx (#0605). No other Moon Base project is tied to a gap.

Surprising:

• No Moon Base gaps in the middle bins. None of the 18 gaps in bins 4–5 is named for Moon Base Phase 1. The four lunar ISRU gaps the Users Guide does name (#0601, #0603, #0604, #0605) are rated 53–56.
• #0501 has no child gaps of its own. All four are starred children of #0806 and #1001.
• Mars power (#0902). It marks ✓MD-07 "Primary Mars Surface Power Generation Technology", and the newer Users Guide says fission "has already" been selected. This is the first evidence for what ✓ means (open question 12).
• IPEx has two names and three capacity figures across three sources (open question 4).
• #0605 lists only the Sustained Lunar Evolution segment, yet the Users Guide names it for Phase 1. Per SCHEMA, segments are not mapped to phases, so the page records this without calling it a conflict.
• #0308 has a "Moon/Mars" target and the SLE segment, but every use case it lists is a Mars one.
• #0102 is Mars-only. No tech gap covers lunar surface-to-Earth bandwidth. The Users Guide handles that as a Phase 1 functional gap (FN-C-105 L, "> 500Mbps").

For the next session (data gaps spreadsheet and the ACR25 data-gaps white paper):

• The data-gap links already in the wiki use data-gaps/dn-0NN-l.md (technology-and-knowledge-challenges, #0504, #0601, #0603, #0604, #0605, #1201).
• Check whether DN-001 L to DN-019 L is the whole lunar list; the challenges page asks this.
• Write gap and data-gap Moon Base relevance from the reverse index in moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md.
• Users Guide page numbers, checked against the PDF:
  • p. 8: Phase 1 robotics and comms
  • p. 9: habitation and logistics, plus the mobility heading and targets
  • p. 10: the mobility functions, power and transportation
  • p. 12: the two headline challenges, "Securing sites", "Small cargo return" and "Surface-to-surface comms" (per the text layer)
  • p. 13: the other nine associated challenges
• Hyphens. The PDF font draws hyphens on pp. 12–13 as blanks, so quotations from those pages differ between session 1 and session 3 pages (open question 17). This is left for the lint pass.

Session 2 — 2026-10-01 — Technology gaps spreadsheet, gaps rated 1–29

Read:

• the whole tech-gap CSV (57 rows). The xlsx wasn't opened, so the sheet title is inferred from the extraction file name.
• for cross-links: the session 1 pages moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md, moon-base/phase-1-functional-gaps.md and moon-base/environment.md.

Created:

• the spreadsheet source page sources/2025-12-2025-architecture-driven-technology-gaps.md: column guide, bin/rating table, caveats
• 29 gap pages, gaps/esdmd-NNNN.md, for ratings 1–29 (bins 1–3, minus #0504)

Updated: index.md (new "Technology gaps" table), queue.md, open-questions.md (additions to 3 and 4; new 11–15), moon-base/environment.md (design targets from #0804 and #0301), moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md (forward-link note).

How the pages are built:

• Gap pages follow SCHEMA's gap sections. The spreadsheet column "Architecture Impacts and Benefits" has no SCHEMA section, so it is an "Impacts and benefits" paragraph under Description.
• Description, state of the art and target are quoted in full, with zero-width spaces removed.
• Moon Base relevance uses only the Users Guide's explicit list (reverse index in moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md). 14 of the 29 are named there. The other 15 say "Not established by the sources so far".
• Where a gap's traceability names a function that is also a Users Guide Phase 1 functional gap, the page notes it under Traceability as a labeled cross-reference (open question 11).
• Comparisons across scopes are given side by side and not called contradictions: 350 h versus 120+ h, the 20 kW FE target versus the 5 kW Phase 1 target, and 100s–1000s kg versus 10 kg.

Forward-link slugs chosen here (reuse them):

• segments: foundational-exploration, sustained-lunar-evolution, humans-to-mars
• sub-architectures, from the spreadsheet's names: autonomous-systems-and-robotics, communications-and-positioning-navigation-and-timing-systems, data-systems-and-management, habitation-systems, human-systems, infrastructure-support, in-situ-resource-utilization-systems, logistics-systems, mobility-systems, power-systems, transportation-systems, utilization-systems
• also forward-linked: gap pages for ratings 30–57, gaps/index.md, data-gaps/dn-0NN-l.md

Surprising:

• The bins are contiguous blocks of ratings (1–6, 7–15, 16–30, 31–36, 37–48, 49–57), but nothing says whether 1 is the highest priority.

• 0903 (PMAD) is the gap the Users Guide cites most for Moon Base: four challenges.

• The ISRU gaps are rated 52–56, in bin 6. Four of them (#0601, #0603, #0604, #0605) are named for Moon Base Phase 1.

• 1001 lists no Foundational Exploration segment, yet the Users Guide ties it to Phase 1.

• 0804's PSR target of ~20–30 K fits the colder PSR temperature figure (open question 3).

For the next session (ratings 30–57 and gaps/index.md):

• Start at #0504 (rating 30, bin 3). Rating 30 is still bin 3.
• Five gaps left to write are named for Moon Base: #0504, #0601, #0603, #0604, #0605.

• 0605 gives IPEx as "10 metric tons … over 14 days". The web page says 11 days. Open

  question 4 already records this; cite it on the #0605 page.

• 0601 and #0603 targets say "Sustained Lunar Exploration", while the Segments column says

  "Sustained Lunar Evolution".
• More function cross-references: FN-H-102 L in #0306, and FN-A-302 L in #1002 and #1004.
• Copy the page pattern from any session 2 gap page, e.g. gaps/esdmd-0903.md.

Session 1 — 2026-10-01 — Moon Base Users Guide and Moon Base pages

Read:

• the Users Guide, all 16 pages, with pp. 4 and 8–13 checked against the raw PDF because the text extraction scrambles those graphics
• the March 2026 Artemis fact sheet
• all nine pages in sources/moon-base/
• in the tech-gap and data-gap spreadsheets, only the header rows and the ID column, to confirm link names. The tech-gap IDs are ESDMD #NNNN, and all 19 the Users Guide cites exist in the Rev C spreadsheet. The data-gap IDs are DN-001 L and so on, so the data-gaps/dn-001-l.md naming fits.

Created:

• 11 source pages in sources/: the two PDFs and the nine web pages
• 9 pages in moon-base/: index (hub), phases, priorities, phase-1-functional-gaps, technology-and-knowledge-challenges, environment, missions-and-assets, surface-technology, mars-forward

Updated: index.md, queue.md, open-questions.md (10 items).

Surprising:

• The Users Guide is the only source so far that ties ADD gap IDs to Moon Base. It names 19 tech gaps and DN-001 L to DN-019 L, but for Phase 1 only.
• Phase dates appear only on the web pages, not in the Users Guide.
• Two of the eight Phase 1 missions are not at the South Pole: IM-3 goes to Reiner Gamma and Blue Ghost M2 to the far side.
• Gateway hardware is being repurposed. PPE goes to SR-1 Freedom and HALO power and avionics to Northrop Grumman surface demonstrations.
• Sources disagree on PSR minimum temperature and on IPEx capacity (open questions 3–4).

For the next sessions:

• Links to gaps/esdmd-*.md, data-gaps/dn-0NN-l.md and the two spreadsheet source pages are forward links; sessions 2–4 create those pages.
• When writing each gap page's "Moon Base relevance" section, use the reverse index in moon-base/technology-and-knowledge-challenges.md. A gap the Users Guide names is tied to a Phase 1 challenge. For other gaps write "Not established by the sources so far".
• Function IDs are normalized to FN-X-NNN L.
• Web pages are cited by section heading, which is provisional (open question 1).