Architecture-Driven Data Gaps (ACR25 white paper)¶

Document: Architecture-Driven Data Gaps, a four-page white paper headed "2025 Moon to Mars Architecture" and footed "2025 Moon to Mars Architecture Concept Review". No date is printed. The download path (/2025/12/) dates it to December 2025, and the file name ends in -v3. Files: text sources/text/docs/2025-12-acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.txt; raw sources/raw/docs/2025-12-acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.pdf (fetched 2026-10-01T07:22:47Z from https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/acr25-wp-data-gaps-v3.pdf, per sources/manifest.csv). Pages 1–3 were checked against the PDF, because their figures and Table Two come out scrambled in the text layer.

Summary. The white paper explains what an architecture-driven data gap is, where the list comes from, and how NASA means partners to use it. The list was "first issued in revision C of the Architecture Definition Document". It is a demand signal, not a procurement list, and it will be revised every year. The gaps themselves are in the data gaps spreadsheet; the paper reproduces one (DN-001 L) as an example.

Definition¶

"Architecture-driven data gaps represent missing or incomplete information needed to plan, build, deploy, and operate systems in the lunar and Martian environments" (p. 1).
They "exist where a lack of knowledge hinders NASA's ability to achieve its Moon to Mars Objectives. In these instances, available data does not fully meet an expressed need for information." The missing information "could impact the agency's ability to perform architecture analyses, characterize or reduce mission risk, develop hardware, mature technology, advance science, or enable crew health and performance" (p. 1). The Users Guide gives the same list without "crew health and performance" (Users Guide, p. 11).
What they are not. They "are agnostic to how the data should be collected; they identify a need, but do not prescribe how NASA or its partners could acquire the data. The data gaps are not procurement directives, nor do they set a monetary value for needed data. They do not include efforts to enhance data that is already acquired (e.g., post processing)" (p. 1).
What they are for. They are "meant to spark conversations between NASA and its partners in industry, academia, and the international community. The data gaps communicate a demand signal and indicate partnership potential" (p. 1).

Figure One: data need, acquirable data, data gap¶

Figure One (p. 1, read from the PDF) draws a data gap where two sets overlap:

"Data Needed to Support Architecture", "Traced to Moon to Mars Objectives". Its box defines a data need as "Information, such as a specific measurement, that has value to Artemis and Moon to Mars activities by enabling the advancement of science, technology, exploration, or operations."
"Potential Available Data", "Partner Interest". Its box defines acquirable data as "Information that can be obtained through NASA and/or partner activities used to generate data products and inform analysis."
In the overlap: "Architecture-Driven Data Gap", which "Communicates a Demand Signal". Its box defines a data gap as "Information not satisfied by available data and is necessary for architecture development. Requires the acquisition of new data."
Below it: "Target Measurement Parameters", which "Defines measurable goals for data providers", and "Impact and Benefits", which "Defines value of closing gap to stakeholders".

The text says data gaps are "a subset of data needs" (p. 2). ADD Rev C reproduces the same diagram, with the same labels, as "Defining Architecture-Driven Data Gaps" (ADD Rev C, p. 80, read from the PDF). The ADD's own definitions are on the data gaps index.

Where the list comes from¶

Knowledge decomposition. "Just as NASA understands the architecture's technical needs through a functional decomposition … the agency understands the architecture's data needs through knowledge decomposition activities". In it, NASA "coordinates across its mission directorates (i.e., Science Mission Directorate, Space Operations Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, and Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate) to identify the information it needs to plan utilization activities and accomplish its exploration goals. In cases where the agency lacks necessary information, it documents a data gap." "Not everything in the knowledge decomposition evolves into a data gap" (p. 2).
Figure Two (p. 2, read from the PDF) is a flow inside a box labeled "Agency Internal": "Stakeholder Inputs" feed a "Knowledge Decomposition" of four boxes ("Enabling Action", "Utilization Outcome", "Investigation", "Knowledge Need"), linked to "Moon to Mars Objectives". It leads to "Architecture-Driven Data Needs" and then "Architecture-Driven Data Gaps", "Published in the Architecture Definition Document". The figure's small annotations are not legible at the resolution checked.
Partner data. "As partner capabilities grow, NASA can increasingly rely on industry, academia, and the international community for mission-critical data." CLPS providers "are gathering potentially valuable data as they deliver payloads to the Moon". NASA "can acquire this partner data through data-sharing agreements, data buys, or other methods" (p. 2).

Data gaps and technology gaps¶

"While technology gaps describe the architecture's technology development needs, data gaps describe information needed. Technology gaps and data gaps can be connected (e.g., new data is needed to inform performance targets for technology development). As the list of data gaps list evolves or is addressed, NASA will continue to track the connections and dependencies between architecture-driven data and technology gaps" (p. 2). The paper doesn't list any such connections. See the tech gaps spreadsheet.

Table One: what each gap records¶

Table One (p. 2) defines the components "as they appear in the Architecture Definition Document":

Component	Definition
Description	"Defines the data needed"
Objectives	"Provides traceability to the Moon to Mars Objectives in terms of how the data contributes to objective satisfaction"
Segment	"Provides traceability to the Moon to Mars Architecture in terms of timeframe NASA needs the data"
Target Measurement Parameters	"Sets the threshold for data quality, establishing a goal for data providers"
Impacts and Benefits	"Explains the significance the data; usually tied to enabling architecture analyses, characterizing risks, maturing technologies, or advancing scientific understanding"
Current State of Data	"Describes relevant available data and existing solutions to acquire data; these may not fully satisfy the need or provide a robust, reliable solution"

The spreadsheet splits "Impacts and Benefits" into two columns and adds need driver and data type (data gaps spreadsheet).

How the list will change¶

"The list of architecture-driven data gaps — first issued in revision C of the Architecture Definition Document — is a small set meant to inform partners of NASA's high priority, near-term needs. It is not a comprehensive representation of all of NASA's data needs" (p. 3).
"The data gaps will evolve as NASA refines the architecture during its annual strategic analysis cycle. NASA will validate, update, add, or close gaps … Annual revisions of the Architecture Definition Document will include updated lists." NASA "will engage its partners for feedback, initiating new data gaps and refining existing ones" (p. 3).
Key takeaway: the Rev C gaps "are an initial list of high-priority, near-term items; they are not a comprehensive or prioritized representation of NASA's data needs" (p. 4).

Table Two: data utility of four gaps¶

Table Two (p. 3, read from the PDF) gives "Representative architecture-driven data gaps and examples of data utility". These utility statements appear only here, not in the spreadsheet:

ID	Data gap (as printed in the table)	Data utility
DN-002 L	"Comprehensive, high-fidelity elevation map coverage of lunar south pole exploration zones and sites"	"To better enable characterization of lunar landing sites and increase confidence in landing accuracy and mobility system navigation."
DN-007 L	"In situ measurements of the horizontal and vertical distribution, abundance, and physical makeup of shallow bulk water ice"	"To enable better identification of potential sites for in-situ resource utilization activities."
DN-008 L	"Geotechnical properties of highland regolith at the lunar south pole"	"To enable higher certainty in the landing environment to inform lander design and site selection."
DN-017 L	"In situ measurement of particle velocity during lunar plume surface interaction (PSI) phenomena"	"To enable better modelling of the interactions between landers and surface regolith to mitigate risk of damage to hardware."

The table's DN-002 L title drops "digital" and "(DEM)" from the spreadsheet's title.

Repeated in the 2025 Architecture Update. The Update's data-gaps feature reproduces Figure One and this table, with the same four gaps and utility statements. Its gap titles print "In-situ" where this table has "In situ". It also carries over the paper's paragraph on data and technology gaps, including "As the list of data gaps list evolves" (2025 Architecture Update, p. 11, read from the PDF).

Figure Three: an example gap¶

Figure Three (p. 3) reproduces the full record of DN-001 L as an "example architecture-driven data gap and associated metrics from NASA's Architecture Definition Document". Its text matches the spreadsheet row. The figure's embedded text carries the heading "Appendix E: Architecture-Driven Data Gaps" and the page number 265, so the ADD's Appendix E holds the same records. The ADD confirms it: ADD Rev C p. 265 is the DN-001 L table, and all 25 Appendix E tables are compared with the spreadsheet on its source page (ADD Rev C, p. 265).

Oddities¶

Reference 1 ("Architecture Definition Document") links to the Rev B file (esdmd-001-add-rev-b.pdf), although the text is about Revision C (p. 4). The wiki's page for Rev C is ADD Rev C.
Reference 4 points to the 2024 technology-gaps white paper (ACR24), not a 2025 one (p. 4). Its source page is here.

Data gaps spreadsheet · data gaps index · Technology and knowledge challenges · Moon Base Users Guide · ADD Rev C · 2025 Architecture Update