research report on space exploration

• Our Program Divisions
• Our Three Academies
• Government Affairs
• Statement on Diversity and Inclusion
• Our Study Process
• Conflict of Interest Policies and Procedures
• Project Comments and Information
• Read Our Expert Reports and Published Proceedings
• Explore PNAS, the Flagship Scientific Journal of NAS
• Access Transportation Research Board Publications
• Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Economic Recovery
• Fellowships and Grants
• Publications by Division
• Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
• Division on Earth and Life Studies
• Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
• Gulf Research Program
• Health and Medicine Division
• Policy and Global Affairs Division
• Transportation Research Board
• National Academy of Sciences
• National Academy of Engineering
• National Academy of Medicine
• Publications by Topic
• Agriculture
• Behavioral and Social Sciences
• Biography and Autobiography
• Biology and Life Sciences
• Computers and Information Technology
• Conflict and Security Issues
• Earth Sciences
• Energy and Energy Conservation
• Engineering and Technology
• Environment and Environmental Studies
• Food and Nutrition
• Health and Medicine
• Industry and Labor
• Math, Chemistry, and Physics
• Policy for Science and Technology
• Space and Aeronautics
• Surveys and Statistics
• Transportation and Infrastructure
• Searchable Collections
• New Releases

VIEW LARGER COVER

Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration

Life and physical sciences research for a new era.

More than four decades have passed since a human first set foot on the Moon. Great strides have been made in our understanding of what is required to support an enduring human presence in space, as evidenced by progressively more advanced orbiting human outposts, culminating in the current International Space Station (ISS). However, of the more than 500 humans who have so far ventured into space, most have gone only as far as near-Earth orbit, and none have traveled beyond the orbit of the Moon. Achieving humans' further progress into the solar system had proved far more difficult than imagined in the heady days of the Apollo missions, but the potential rewards remain substantial.

During its more than 50-year history, NASA's success in human space exploration has depended on the agency's ability to effectively address a wide range of biomedical, engineering, physical science, and related obstacles—an achievement made possible by NASA's strong and productive commitments to life and physical sciences research for human space exploration, and by its use of human space exploration infrastructures for scientific discovery. The Committee for the Decadal Survey of Biological and Physical Sciences acknowledges the many achievements of NASA, which are all the more remarkable given budgetary challenges and changing directions within the agency. In the past decade, however, a consequence of those challenges has been a life and physical sciences research program that was dramatically reduced in both scale and scope, with the result that the agency is poorly positioned to take full advantage of the scientific opportunities offered by the now fully equipped and staffed ISS laboratory, or to effectively pursue the scientific research needed to support the development of advanced human exploration capabilities.

Although its review has left it deeply concerned about the current state of NASA's life and physical sciences research, the Committee for the Decadal Survey on Biological and Physical Sciences in Space is nevertheless convinced that a focused science and engineering program can achieve successes that will bring the space community, the U.S. public, and policymakers to an understanding that we are ready for the next significant phase of human space exploration. The goal of this report is to lay out steps and develop a forward-looking portfolio of research that will provide the basis for recapturing the excitement and value of human spaceflight—thereby enabling the U.S. space program to deliver on new exploration initiatives that serve the nation, excite the public, and place the United States again at the forefront of space exploration for the global good.

RESOURCES AT A GLANCE

• Report Brief
• ↓ Scroll Down for More Resources
• Space and Aeronautics — Space Exploration and Development
• Space and Aeronautics — Space Systems and Hardware

Suggested Citation

National Research Council. 2011. Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences Research for a New Era . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13048. Import this citation to: Bibtex EndNote Reference Manager

Publication Info

• Paperback:  978-0-309-16384-2
• Ebook:  978-0-309-27879-9

What is skim?

The Chapter Skim search tool presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter. You may select key terms to highlight them within pages of each chapter.

Related Information

This report is the foundation for the booklet, Research for a Future in Space: The Role of Life and Physical Sciences . To download this report for free, visit the catalog page here .

Copyright Information

The National Academies Press (NAP) has partnered with Copyright Clearance Center's Marketplace service to offer you a variety of options for reusing NAP content. Through Marketplace, you may request permission to reprint NAP content in another publication, course pack, secure website, or other media. Marketplace allows you to instantly obtain permission, pay related fees, and print a license directly from the NAP website. The complete terms and conditions of your reuse license can be found in the license agreement that will be made available to you during the online order process. To request permission through Marketplace you are required to create an account by filling out a simple online form. The following list describes license reuses offered by the NAP through Marketplace:

• Republish text, tables, figures, or images in print
• Post on a secure Intranet/Extranet website
• Use in a PowerPoint Presentation
• Distribute via CD-ROM

Click here to obtain permission for the above reuses. If you have questions or comments concerning the Marketplace service, please contact:

Marketplace Support International +1.978.646.2600 US Toll Free +1.855.239.3415 E-mail: [email protected] marketplace.copyright.com

To request permission to distribute a PDF, please contact our Customer Service Department at [email protected] .

What is a prepublication?

An uncorrected copy, or prepublication, is an uncorrected proof of the book. We publish prepublications to facilitate timely access to the committee's findings.

What happens when I pre-order?

The final version of this book has not been published yet. You can pre-order a copy of the book and we will send it to you when it becomes available. We will not charge you for the book until it ships. Pricing for a pre-ordered book is estimated and subject to change. All backorders will be released at the final established price. As a courtesy, if the price increases by more than $3.00 we will notify you. If the price decreases, we will simply charge the lower price. Applicable discounts will be extended.

Downloading and Using eBooks from NAP

What is an ebook.

An ebook is one of two file formats that are intended to be used with e-reader devices and apps such as Amazon Kindle or Apple iBooks.

Why is an eBook better than a PDF?

A PDF is a digital representation of the print book, so while it can be loaded into most e-reader programs, it doesn't allow for resizable text or advanced, interactive functionality. The eBook is optimized for e-reader devices and apps, which means that it offers a much better digital reading experience than a PDF, including resizable text and interactive features (when available).

Where do I get eBook files?

eBook files are now available for a large number of reports on the NAP.edu website. If an eBook is available, you'll see the option to purchase it on the book page.

View more FAQ's about Ebooks

Types of Publications

Consensus Study Report: Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Frontiers | Science News

• Science News

Research Topics

Reach for the stars: research topics on space exploration.

With recent advances in commercial space exploration, we have curated a list of our best Research Topics on outer space. Explore collections edited by experts from NASA, The Goddard Space Flight Center, Space Science Institute, German Aerospace Center, Canadian Space Agency, National Space Science Center, European Space Agency, International Space University, and many more.

Research Topics:

Optimization of Exercise Countermeasures for Human Space Flight – Lessons from Terrestrial Physiology and Operational Implementation

Biology in Space: Challenges and Opportunities

Microbiology of Extreme and Human-Made Confined Environments (Spacecraft, Space Stations, Cleanrooms, and Analogous Sites)

Geospace Observation of Natural Hazards

Astrobiology of Mars, Europa, Titan and Enceladus - Most Likely Places for Alien Life

Imagining the Future of Astronomy and Space Science

Brains in Space: Effects of Spaceflight on the Human Brain and Behavior

Creative Performance in Extreme Human Environments: Astronauts and Space

Space Traffic Management: a new era in Earth orbit

Wound Management and Healing in Space

Robotic Manipulation and Capture in Space

A Multidisciplinary Approach to designing Sensorimotor Adaptation countermeasures for space exploration missions

Active Experiments in Space: Past, Present, and Future

On-orbit Manufacturing and Assembly Technologies for Future Space Activities

Current and Future Instrumentation for the Detection and Identification of Signatures of Life on Mars and Beyond

On-Orbit Servicing and Active Debris Removal: Enabling a Paradigm Shift in Spaceflight

Space Weather with Small Satellites

AI in the Space Sciences

Higher Plants, Algae and Cyanobacteria in Space Environments

Post related info

October 11, 2021

Frontiers Communications

Post categories, space sciences and astronomy, related subjects, research topics, related content.

Life from Earth could temporarily survive on Mars

Meet a team of scientists working to prevent interplanetary pollution that could pose a threat to life on Earth and other planets

NASA space data can cut disaster response times, costs

Latest posts.

Excessive light pollution may increase risk of Alzheimer's, especially in younger people

Will humans accept robots that can lie? Scientists find it depends on the lie

When procrastination becomes unhealthy: Here are five Frontiers articles you won’t want to miss

Large sharks may be hunting each other – and scientists know because of a swallowed tracking tag

Promising antibiotic candidates discovered in microbes deep in the Arctic Sea

Get the latest research updates, subscribe to our newsletter

IEEE Account

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

Motivations for space activity

• Major milestones
• Significant milestones in space exploration
• Tsiolkovsky
• Other space pioneers
• United States
• Soviet Union
• Preparing for spaceflight
• The first satellites
• International participation
• Involvement of industry
• Gemini and Voskhod
• The American commitment
• The Soviet response
• Interim developments
• The Apollo lunar landings and Apollo-Soyuz
• Space stations
• International space endurance records
• Summary of space stations launched since 1971
• The space shuttle
• Risks and benefits
• Selecting people for spaceflights
• Biomedical, psychological, and sociological aspects
• Solar and space physics
• Solar system exploration
• Exploring the universe
• Microgravity research
• Observing Earth
• Meteorology
• Positioning, navigation, and timing
• Military and national security uses of space
• Satellite telecommunications
• Remote sensing
• Commercial space transportation
• New commercial applications
• Issues for the future
• Crewed spaceflights, 1960–69
• Crewed spaceflights, 1970–79
• Crewed spaceflights, 1980–89
• Crewed spaceflights, 1990–99
• Crewed spaceflights, 2000–09
• Crewed spaceflights, 2010–2019
• Crewed spaceflights, 2020–

space exploration

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Official Site of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum
• Council on Foreign Relations - Space Exploration and U.S. Competitiveness
• National Geographic Society - The History of Space Exploration
• National Center for Biotechnology Information - PubMed Central - Space exploration and economic growth: New issues and horizons
• space exploration - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• space exploration - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

Recent News

space exploration , investigation, by means of crewed and uncrewed spacecraft , of the reaches of the universe beyond Earth ’s atmosphere and the use of the information so gained to increase knowledge of the cosmos and benefit humanity. A complete list of all crewed spaceflights, with details on each mission’s accomplishments and crew, is available in the section Chronology of crewed spaceflights .

Humans have always looked at the heavens and wondered about the nature of the objects seen in the night sky. With the development of rockets and the advances in electronics and other technologies in the 20th century, it became possible to send machines and animals and then people above Earth’s atmosphere into outer space . Well before technology made these achievements possible, however, space exploration had already captured the minds of many people, not only aircraft pilots and scientists but also writers and artists. The strong hold that space travel has always had on the imagination may well explain why professional astronauts and laypeople alike consent at their great peril, in the words of Tom Wolfe in The Right Stuff (1979), to sit “on top of an enormous Roman candle, such as a Redstone, Atlas , Titan or Saturn rocket , and wait for someone to light the fuse.” It perhaps also explains why space exploration has been a common and enduring theme in literature and art. As centuries of speculative fiction in books and more recently in films make clear, “one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind” was taken by the human spirit many times and in many ways before Neil Armstrong stamped humankind’s first footprint on the Moon .

Achieving spaceflight enabled humans to begin to explore the solar system and the rest of the universe, to understand the many objects and phenomena that are better observed from a space perspective, and to use for human benefit the resources and attributes of the space environment . All of these activities—discovery, scientific understanding, and the application of that understanding to serve human purposes—are elements of space exploration . (For a general discussion of spacecraft , launch considerations, flight trajectories, and navigation , docking, and recovery procedures, see spaceflight .)

Overview of recent space achievements

Although the possibility of exploring space has long excited people in many walks of life, for most of the latter 20th century and into the early 21st century, only national governments could afford the very high costs of launching people and machines into space. This reality meant that space exploration had to serve very broad interests, and it indeed has done so in a variety of ways. Government space programs have increased knowledge, served as indicators of national prestige and power, enhanced national security and military strength, and provided significant benefits to the general public. In areas where the private sector could profit from activities in space, most notably the use of satellites as telecommunication relays, commercial space activity has flourished without government funding. In the early 21st century, entrepreneurs believed that there were several other areas of commercial potential in space, most notably privately funded space travel.

In the years after World War II , governments assumed a leading role in the support of research that increased fundamental knowledge about nature, a role that earlier had been played by universities, private foundations, and other nongovernmental supporters. This change came for two reasons. First, the need for complex equipment to carry out many scientific experiments and for the large teams of researchers to use that equipment led to costs that only governments could afford. Second, governments were willing to take on this responsibility because of the belief that fundamental research would produce new knowledge essential to the health, the security, and the quality of life of their citizens. Thus, when scientists sought government support for early space experiments, it was forthcoming. Since the start of space efforts in the United States , the Soviet Union , and Europe , national governments have given high priority to the support of science done in and from space. From modest beginnings, space science has expanded under government support to include multibillion-dollar exploratory missions in the solar system. Examples of such efforts include the development of the Curiosity Mars rover, the Cassini-Huygens mission to Saturn and its moons, and the development of major space-based astronomical observatories such as the Hubble Space Telescope .

Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in 1957 used the fact that his country had been first to launch a satellite as evidence of the technological power of the Soviet Union and of the superiority of communism . He repeated these claims after Yuri Gagarin ’s orbital flight in 1961. Although U.S. Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower had decided not to compete for prestige with the Soviet Union in a space race, his successor, John F. Kennedy , had a different view. On April 20, 1961, in the aftermath of the Gagarin flight, he asked his advisers to identify a “space program which promises dramatic results in which we could win.” The response came in a May 8, 1961, memorandum recommending that the United States commit to sending people to the Moon , because “dramatic achievements in space…symbolize the technological power and organizing capacity of a nation” and because the ensuing prestige would be “part of the battle along the fluid front of the cold war.” From 1961 until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, competition between the United States and the Soviet Union was a major influence on the pace and content of their space programs. Other countries also viewed having a successful space program as an important indicator of national strength.

Even before the first satellite was launched, U.S. leaders recognized that the ability to observe military activities around the world from space would be an asset to national security. Following on the success of its photoreconnaissance satellites, which began operation in 1960, the United States built increasingly complex observation and electronic-intercept intelligence satellites. The Soviet Union also quickly developed an array of intelligence satellites, and later a few other countries instituted their own satellite observation programs. Intelligence-gathering satellites have been used to verify arms-control agreements, provide warnings of military threats, and identify targets during military operations, among other uses.

In addition to providing security benefits, satellites offered military forces the potential for improved communications, weather observation, navigation, timing, and position location. This led to significant government funding for military space programs in the United States and the Soviet Union. Although the advantages and disadvantages of stationing force-delivery weapons in space have been debated, as of the early 21st century, such weapons had not been deployed , nor had space-based antisatellite systems—that is, systems that can attack or interfere with orbiting satellites. The stationing of weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies is prohibited by international law .

Governments realized early on that the ability to observe Earth from space could provide significant benefits to the general public apart from security and military uses. The first application to be pursued was the development of satellites for assisting in weather forecasting . A second application involved remote observation of land and sea surfaces to gather imagery and other data of value in crop forecasting, resource management, environmental monitoring, and other applications. The U.S., the Soviet Union, Europe, and China also developed their own satellite-based global positioning systems , originally for military purposes, that could pinpoint a user’s exact location, help in navigating from one point to another, and provide very precise time signals. These satellites quickly found numerous civilian uses in such areas as personal navigation, surveying and cartography, geology, air-traffic control , and the operation of information-transfer networks. They illustrate a reality that has remained constant for a half century—as space capabilities are developed, they often can be used for both military and civilian purposes.

Another space application that began under government sponsorship but quickly moved into the private sector is the relay of voice, video, and data via orbiting satellites. Satellite telecommunications has developed into a multibillion-dollar business and is the one clearly successful area of commercial space activity. A related, but economically much smaller, commercial space business is the provision of launches for private and government satellites. In 2004 a privately financed venture sent a piloted spacecraft, SpaceShipOne , to the lower edge of space for three brief suborbital flights. Although it was technically a much less challenging achievement than carrying humans into orbit, its success was seen as an important step toward opening up space to commercial travel and eventually to tourism . More than 15 years after SpaceShipOne reached space, several firms began to carry out such suborbital flights. Companies have arisen that also use satellite imagery to provide data for business about economic trends . Suggestions have been made that in the future other areas of space activity, including using resources found on the Moon and near-Earth asteroids and the capture of solar energy to provide electric power on Earth , could become successful businesses.

Most space activities have been pursued because they serve some utilitarian purpose, whether increasing knowledge, adding to national power, or making a profit . Nevertheless, there remains a powerful underlying sense that it is important for humans to explore space for its own sake, “to see what is there.” Although the only voyages that humans have made away from the near vicinity of Earth—the Apollo flights to the Moon—were motivated by Cold War competition, there have been recurrent calls for humans to return to the Moon, travel to Mars, and visit other locations in the solar system and beyond. Until humans resume such journeys of exploration, robotic spacecraft will continue to serve in their stead to explore the solar system and probe the mysteries of the universe.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 25 March 2023

Toward the utilisation of resources in space: knowledge gaps, open questions, and priorities

• Jan Cilliers 1   na1 ,
• Kathryn Hadler 1 , 2   na1 &
• Joshua Rasera   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0136-3308 1   na1  

npj Microgravity volume  9 , Article number:  22 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

3282 Accesses

6 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Engineering
• Scientific community

There are many open science questions in space resource utilisation due to the novelty and relative immaturity of the field. While many potential technologies have been proposed to produce usable resources in space, high confidence, large-scale design is limited by gaps in the knowledge of the local environmental conditions, geology, mineralogy, and regolith characteristics, as well as specific science questions intrinsic to each process. Further, the engineering constraints (e.g. energy, throughput, efficiency etc.) must be incorporated into the design. This work aims to summarise briefly recent activities in the field of space resource utilisation, as well as to identify key knowledge gaps, and to present open science questions. Finally, future exploration priorities to enable the use of space resources are highlighted.

Similar content being viewed by others

Conceptualizing space environmental sustainability

Exploring outer space biophysical phenomena via SpaceLID

Microbial biomanufacturing for space-exploration—what to take and when to make

Introduction.

The use of space resources is critical for the future of long-term and deep-space exploration. Space exploration presents challenges for sustainability; single-use launchers, non-refuelable satellites, and a need for all hardware and consumables to be supplied from Earth, all add appreciable resource use and cost to space programmes. Fortunately, significant progress is being made: SpaceX are Blue Origin are demonstrating the value of re-usable launch systems 1 ; on-orbit refuelling is being developed by start-ups such as Orbit Fab and Orbital Express, as well as established actors, such as Airbus and Busek 2 .

The use of space resources to provide propellant, habitation and materials critical to support human life (e.g. water, oxygen) will unlock the full potential of space exploration, enabling humans to travel further and spend longer in space 3 , 4 , 5 . This will transform the economics of space exploration.

The use of space resources, known as in situ resource utilisation (ISRU), or more generally as space resource utilisation (SRU), is not a new concept. A detailed history of SRU is provided by Meurisse and Carpenter 6 . In brief, the utilisation of space resources was first suggested by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, widely considered the originator of modern approaches to rocketry, in 1903 7 , 8 . Lunar SRU was proposed by Clarke 9 in the 1950s. During the Apollo Era in the 1960s, SRU was suggested by Carr 10 as a practical means to reduce launch mass and terrestrial dependency. In the subsequent 50 years, the concept has grown in maturity. Many terrestrial studies have been undertaken to design and test candidate technologies (e.g., refs. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ).

As of 2022, SRU has been demonstrated only once in space, despite these technologies playing an key role in ESA’s and NASA’s space exploration road maps 12 , 18 . The MOXIE ( M ars OX ygen I SRU E xperiment) payload on board NASA’s Perseverance Rover produced oxygen from Mars’ CO 2 -rich atmosphere in 2021 by solid oxide electrolysis 19 . Lunar SRU demonstration missions are under development (e.g., refs. 20 , 21 ), and preliminary missions to test new SRU legal and economic frameworks are scheduled throughout 2023, for example ispace inc.’s HAKUTO-R Mission 1, currently en route to the Moon 22 , 23 .

Today, accessing and using space resources is a focus of many space agencies 18 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , governments 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , intergovernmental organisations 32 , 33 , and private industry 34 , 35 , 36 . More recently, there has been renewed interest in SRU for a number of applications, such as:

Producing oxygen and metals on the Moon and Mars (e.g. refs. 19 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 );

Extracting water from the lunar poles (e.g. refs. 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 );

Extracting water, volatiles and metals from near-Earth objects (e.g. refs. 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 );

Construction of habitats and thermal shelters, including by additive manufacturing (e.g. refs. 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 ); and,

The manufacture of equipment and technology from local resources (e.g. refs. 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 ).

Demonstration-scale SRU projects are a viable, necessary first step for the industry. Their success will broaden appreciably the knowledge base of the SRU and lunar science communities. Detailed knowledge of the local geology, mineralogy and regolith characteristics will enhance greatly confidence in the designs of mining, extraction and production systems at an industrial scale. Other science questions, intrinsic to each specific process, should be addressed to optimise the design of industrial-scale systems. Both the environmental operating conditions (e.g., local electrostatic and radiation environments) and engineering constraints (e.g. energy use, required throughput, expected efficiency, etc.) will affect equipment designs significantly 77 ). The success of large-scale resource utilisation processes is dependent therefore on a sufficient knowledge of the specific resource and region of interest, as well as the technology capability required to extract useful products.

This work was developed following the European Space Agency’s SciSpacE Space Resources White Paper exercise. Here, knowledge gaps, open science questions, and research priorities for the lunar science and SRU communities are identified. As the capabilities and limitations of SRU are clarified through in situ demonstrations, it will be possible to address many of these gaps and questions, and in doing so, will improve greatly the development of large-scale SRU technologies. Furthermore, answering these questions will provide tremendous value to the scientific community.

The SRU process

The extraction and use of space resources is analogous to the extraction and use of terrestrial resources 78 , 79 . First, the given resource (e.g. oxygen, water ice) must be identified through prospecting and ground truth exploration to increase certainty 80 , 81 . The composition of the surrounding material and the characteristics of the specific resource within that host material must be understood. The variability in the distribution of the resource in a given region is also required. For example, water ice present within regolith or buried under regolith at the lunar poles varies both spatially and by depth 50 , 82 . Adopting suitably modified terrestrial industry standards and best practices for exploration and reporting (e.g., JORC and LORS 81 ), as well as common terminology 78 will encourage participation of, and attract investment from non-space actors in SRU.

The chain of technologies linked together to process a particular ore body on Earth is described by a flowsheet 78 . The flowsheet can be subdivided broadly into three key stages: excavation, beneficiation, and extraction of the final product 78 . Excavation has been explored thoroughly in the literature 83 , as have extraction methods 84 . Beneficiation is the process in which mined material is broken or agglomerated and classified by size into a range suitable for further processing, and also to concentrate one component of interest (e.g. water or ilmenite) by physical removal of undesired components. The beneficiation of mined space material into a form suitable for extraction of the require final product has been studied far less in comparison 85 .

In terrestrial mining, the resource, the surrounding material, the location, and the technology used to extract the resource are matched in the process flowsheet such that either:

The specific resource and its location are targeted depending on available technology; or,

The technology is designed to meet the extraction requirements of a specific target resource.

Demonstration missions to prove SRU technologies and to raise TRLs have immense value for characterising the potential inputs to the flowsheet. However, the characteristics of resource host material on the Moon, Mars or elsewhere in space are also key inputs to flowsheet design. The processing technologies required must be chosen to maximise confidence in the production levels of the resource as well as the overall operational efficiency. It is inappropriate to assume that a ‘one size fits all’ approach to excavation, beneficiation and extraction would be suitable for SRU. Terrestrial mining operations select carefully the mining equipment used based on the characteristics of the target resource; a SRU will benefit undoubtedly from adopting a similar approach.

Space resource utilisation requires engineering solutions to produce a reliable supply of usable products from a naturally variable feedstock 77 . The use of mineral resources for SRU remains untested anywhere in space, however this will change in the coming years with demonstration missions (e.g. PROSPECT), the exploration of the lunar poles, and NASA’s upcoming regolith collection missions 20 , 22 . For SRU to become a realisable option for future space travel, it will be important for early demonstration missions to address as many open science questions as possible, as this will enable ultimately the implementation of SRU at an industrial scale.

Data: the key knowledge gap

There remain many aspects of SRU that are poorly quantified, through lack of available data and samples, and limitations with demonstrating space technologies on the surface of the Earth. The data required to enable SRU in the future can be categorised into two groups: environmental data and resource data. Such data will further have intrinsic scientific value.

Environmental data are critical for the development of robust equipment with high operational availability and long-term usage in mind. Deep knowledge of the local environmental conditions will impact directly the design choices made to ensure that only the most robust and reliable technologies are deployed. The operating environment will affect significantly the design and operation of any process, for example:

Variation in the electrostatic properties of regolith under different conditions (e.g. day and night);

Designing operations for lower gravity, different atmospheric characteristics, or no atmosphere at all;

Designing to withstand extremely high and low temperatures, and the process of cycling through them;

Material handling in dusty environments;

Local radiation environment; and,

Designing for reliability and durability.

Resource data are imperative for selecting appropriate technologies for SRU operations. These data must specify:

The location of the resource;

The resource properties (e.g. concentration, phase, associations);

The host material properties (e.g. regolith mineralogy, particle size distribution, particle shape, geotechnical properties);

The variability in the resource and host material properties (by region, by location and by environmental conditions); and,

The effect of the resource properties on utilisation (e.g. reactor efficiency, construction strength).

To bridge these gaps, high resolution orbital data sets must be captured and correlated to ground-truth exploration activities at select targets. As an illustration, of the proposals that have been developed previously for large-scale exploitation of resources, several have focused on the extraction of water ice at the lunar poles for propellant production (e.g., refs. 17 , 47 , 48 ). These detailed elaborations of production facilities on the Moon are based on assumptions about the form, quantity, variability, and behaviour of icy regolith. At present, there is no ground truth data to verify any of these assumptions, and there are major uncertainties associated with them 86 . Rigorous prospecting and ground truth exploration must be performed in order to raise the level of geological certainty 80 , 81 . This is standard practice on Earth for the economic development of mines, and will be equally relevant for SRU 80 , 81 .

The regolith samples returned by the Apollo and Luna missions of the 1960s and 1970s have incredible value for testing bench scale apparatuses, however the amount of lunar material made available for testing is insufficient to develop industrial-scale equipment. Furthermore, the successful development of terrestrial SRU demonstrators will be dependent on the availability of suitable simulants. However, the scientific community, along with private and public sector actors, must agree on a standardised approach for the characterisation of lunar regolith and lunar regolith simulants. Such a standard would enable honest, transparent, like-for-like comparisons of feedstocks and equipment performance, as well as provide justification for using certain simulants for any given technology demonstration.

Open science questions

There are many open science questions in space resource utilisation due to the novelty and relative immaturity. The following open questions are focused specifically on the applied science aspects needed upscale SRU to an economically viable, industrial scale. One of the benefits of this field is that, with careful design, data and samples required to design SRU processes can be used also to answer open questions of interest to the lunar science community.

Which resource characteristics are required to establish the viability of a resource? This encompasses characteristics of the specific resource such as concentration and occurrence, in addition to those of the host material. Regolith properties, such as size distribution, texture, cohesiveness, electrostatic charge and mineralogy, will be of interest 85 , 86 . The minimum amount of data to increase the geological certainty of a deposit and how it is collected should also be considered 77 , 78 , 80 , 81 . The use of such datasets in fundamental scientific studies (e.g. geology, planetary evolution) should be a key factor in extra-terrestrial mine planning.

How have geological and environmental processes affected properties of resources and how do these properties affect extraction processes? Environmental factors include geological processes (e.g. volcanism, crustal formation), impacts (delivery of resources versus loss of resources during impact reprocessing), solar wind and cosmic ray exposure, and magnetic anomalies. There are many fundamental science questions that can be addressed by understanding the geological and environmental processes occurring in the region of a given space resource, for example impact rate to create local regolith environment. For space resource applications, however, these processes will affect the composition and characteristics of the resource and the host material (e.g. burial depth, porosity, agglutinate content) 87 , 88 , 89 . Geotechnical properties, for example, are affected by the geological makeup (mineralogy, chemistry), impact and space exposure history of the lunar regolith 90 .

How do the local environmental conditions affect the resource and potential operations? For example, electrostatic charging of regolith, gravity, thermal conditions, atmospheric conditions, and radiation. Electrostatic charging of lunar regolith is known to present operational challenges, particularly with regards to reliability 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 . It is not possible to replicate simultaneously all aspects of the lunar environment on Earth, and while rapid developments are being made in the field of regolith simulants 95 , 96 , 97 , the production of agglutinates remains difficult at any scale 98 . Questions remain on the magnitude and distribution of electrostatic charging of regolith, and on how this can be mitigated. In situ studies are critical to enhance understanding. Another aspect of interest is the rate of change of environmental conditions (e.g. the atmosphere of Mars).

What is the variability of resources in a target region and the effect on processing and extracted product variability? Variability is an aspect of resource use that is critical in the long term. Variability in the resource and the host material affects every step of the process, from excavation through to purification of the final product 77 , 99 . Additionally, an understanding of the geological processes, as highlighted previously, will enable better prediction of the resource variability.

What are the physical and chemical processes that can be applied to extract and process local resources? Many processes have been proposed 83 , 84 , 85 , however not all are appropriate for all locations (e.g., hydrogen reduction in the lunar highlands 100 ). Strategies for establishing either the most suitable location or the most suitable process are required. Consideration also must be given to the effect of local conditions on process efficiency; this includes feedstock characteristics. End-to-end processing of the resource, including waste disposal/re-use and product storage are also required.

Outlook and summary

The confident design and successful operation of large- or industrial-scale SRU process operations requires detailed knowledge of the specific resource of interest and suitable extraction technologies. The priority for near-term demonstration missions and future exploration programmes must be to gather high-resolution, high-fidelity data about the performance characteristics of equipment, the local environmental conditions, and the availability of target resources. The terrestrial mining sector has immense expertise in resource exploration; combining this knowledge base with that of lunar/planetary scientists will enable the development of a realistic strategy, fulfilling both scientific goals and enabling SRU. Further, an extensive core and ancillary technology development programme, including optimisation and performance evaluation, is required. This will, in turn, improve the design and development of robust SRU technologies whilst contributing invaluable knowledge to the scientific community.

Orlova, A., Nogueira, R. & Chimenti, P. The present and future of the space sector: a business ecosystem approach. Space Policy 52 , 101374 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Malyh, D., Vaulin, S., Fedorov, V., Peshkov, R. & Shalashov, M. A brief review on in-orbit refueling projects and critical techniques. Aerospace Syst . 5 , 185–196 (2022).

Bobskill, M. R. et al. Preparing for Mars: evolvable mars campaign “proving ground” approach. In 2015 IEEE Aerospace Conference , 1–19 (IEEE, 2015).

Mueller, R. P., Sibille, L., Mantovani, J., Sanders, G. B. & Jones, C. A. Opportunities and strategies for testing and infusion of ISRU in the evolvable mars campaign. In AIAA SPACE 2015 Conference and Exposition , 4459 (AIAA, 2015).

Keaton, P. W. A Moon base/Mars base transportation depot. In Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century (ed. Mendell, W. W.) 141–154 (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 1985).

Meurisse, A. & Carpenter, J. Past, present and future rationale for space resource utilisation. Planet. Space Sci. 182 , 104853 (2020).

Tsiolkovsky, K. The exploration of cosmic space by means of reaction motors. Sci. Rev. Mosc. St. Petersburg 221 , 222 (1903).

Google Scholar  

Mazanek, D. D., Merrill, R. G., Brophy, J. R. & Mueller, R. P. Asteroid redirect mission concept: a bold approach for utilizing space resources. Acta Astronaut. 117 , 163–171 (2015).

Clarke, A. C. Electromagnetic launching as a major contribution to space flight. J. Br. Interplanet. Soc. 9 , 261–267 (1950).

Carr, B. B. Recovery of water or oxygen by reduction of lunar rock. AIAA J. 1 , 921–924 (1963).

McKay, M., McKay, D. & Duke, M. Space resources: NASA SP-509 (NASA, 1992).

Drake, B. G., Hoffman, S. J. & Beaty, D. W. Human exploration of Mars, design reference architecture 5.0. In 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference , 1–24 (IEEE, 2010).

Sanders, G. B. & Larson, W. E. Progress made in lunar in-situ resource utilization under NASA’s Exploration Technology and Development Program. In Earth and Space (NASA, 2012).

Mueller, R. et al. Swamp works: a new approach to develop space mining and resource extraction technologies at the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) Kennedy Space Center (KSC). In Future Mining Forum 2015 , KSC-E-DAA-TN26835 (NASA, 2015).

Dalton, C. & Hohmann, E. Conceptual design of a lunar colony (NASA, 1972).

Linne, D. L. et al. Lunar production system for extracting oxygen from regolith. J. Aerosp. Eng. 34 , 04021043 (2021).

Linne, D. L., Kleinhenz, J. E. & Paz, A. Lunar water pilot plant conceptual design. In ASCEND 2020 , 4236 (AIAA, 2020).

ESA. ESA Space Resources Strategy, https://tinyurl.com/yck54d6t (2019).

Hoffman, J. A. et al. Mars oxygen ISRU experiment (MOXIE)-Preparing for human Mars exploration. Sci. Adv. 8 , eabp8636 (2022).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Barber, S. et al. ProSPA: analysis of lunar polar volatiles and ISRU demonstration on the Moon. In 49th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 2018).

Sanders, G., Kleinhenz, J. & Linne, D. NASA plans for in situ resource utilization (ISRU) development, demonstration, and implementation. In Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) 2022 (COSPAR, 2022).

NASA. NASA selects companies to collect lunar resources for Artemis, https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-selects-companies-to-collect-lunar-resources-for-artemis-demonstrations (2021).

ispace. ispace Announces Mission 1 Launch Date, https://ispace-inc.com/news-en/?p=3939 (2022).

Comstock, D. & Petro, A. Nasa’s centennial challenges contributions to ISRU. In 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition , 1205 (AIAA, 2009).

Sacksteder, K. & Sanders, G. In-situ resource utilization for lunar and mars exploration. In 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit , 345 (AIAA, 2007).

Agency, L. S. Space resources, https://space-agency.public.lu/en/space-resources.html (2022).

NASA. The Artemis Accords, https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis-accords/index.html (2022).

Government of the United States of America. United States Space Priorities Framework . Tech. Rep. (Government of the United States of America, Washington D.C., 2021). https://tinyurl.com/297a9r5j .

The Government of Luxembourg. Spaceresources.lu: New space law to provide framework for space resource utilisation, https://tinyurl.com/5n8y7b3w (2016).

Library of Congress. Japan: Space Resources Act Enacted, https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2021-09-15/japan-space-resources-act-enacted/ (2021).

The Government of the United Arab Emirates. UAE National Space Policy . Tech. Rep. (The Government of the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi, 2021). https://tinyurl.com/y5pa3awy .

UNOOSA. Working group on legal aspects of space resource activities. https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/copuos/lsc/space-resources/index.html (2021).

Association, M. V. Report of the Moon Village Association on the Global Expert Group on Sustainable Lunar Activities. In Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, Sixtieth Session (United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, Vienna, 2021).

Gilber, A. Mining in space is coming (Milken Review, 2021). https://www.milkenreview.org/articles/mining-in-space-is-coming .

Jakhu, R. S., Pelton, J. N. & Nyampong, Y. O. M. Private sector space mining initiatives and policies in the United States. In Space Mining and Its Regulation (Springer, Cham 2017).

Bridenstine, J. Space resources are the key to safe and sustainable lunar exploration, https://blogs.nasa.gov/bridenstine/2020/09/10/space-resources-are-the-key-to-safe-and-sustainable-lunar-exploration/ (2020).

Kleinhenz, J. E. & Paz, A. An ISRU propellant production system for a fully fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle. In 10th Symposium on Space Resource Utilization , 0423 (AIAA, 2017).

Lee, K. A., Oryshchyn, L., Paz, A., Reddington, M. & Simon, T. M. The ROxygen project: Outpost-scale lunar oxygen production system development at johnson space center. J. Aerosp. Eng. 26 , 67–73 (2013).

Grill, L., Ostermeier, P., Würth, M. & Reiss, P. Behaviour of lunar regolith simulants in fluidised bed reactors for in-situ resource utilisation. Planet. Space Sci. 180 , 104757 (2020).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Schwandt, C., Hamilton, J. A., Fray, D. J. & Crawford, I. A. The production of oxygen and metal from lunar regolith. Planet. Space Sci. 74 , 49–56 (2012).

Lomax, B. A. et al. Proving the viability of an electrochemical process for the simultaneous extraction of oxygen and production of metal alloys from lunar regolith. Planet. Space Sci. 180 , 104748 (2020).

Allen, C. C., Morris, R. V. & McKay, D. S. Oxygen extraction from lunar soils and pyroclastic glass. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 101 , 26085–26095 (1996).

Sirk, A. H., Sadoway, D. R. & Sibille, L. Direct electrolysis of molten lunar regolith for the production of oxygen and metals on the moon. ECS Trans. 28 , 367 (2010).

Shaw, M. et al. Mineral processing and metal extraction on the lunar surface-challenges and opportunities. Miner. Process. Extractive Metall. Rev. 43 , 865–891 (2022).

Lu, Y. & Reddy, R. G. Extraction of metals and oxygen from lunar soil. High. Temp. Mater. Process. 27 , 223–234 (2008).

Gibson, M. A. & Knudsen, C. W. Apparatus for manufacture of oxygen from lunar ilmenite. US Patent 5,536,378 (1996).

Sowers, G. F. & Dreyer, C. B. Ice mining in lunar permanently shadowed regions. N. Space 7 , 235–244 (2019).

Kornuta, D. et al. Commercial lunar propellant architecture: a collaborative study of lunar propellant production. Reach 13 , 100026 (2019).

Blair, B. R. et al. Space resource economic analysis toolkit: the case for commercial lunar ice mining . Final report to the NASA Exploration Team (NASA, 2002).

Cannon, K. M. & Britt, D. T. A geologic model for lunar ice deposits at mining scales. Icarus 347 , 113778 (2020).

Brisset, J., Miletich, T. & Metzger, P. Thermal extraction of water ice from the lunar surface-A 3D numerical model. Planet. Space Sci. 193 , 105082 (2020).

Jedicke, R., Sercel, J., Gillis-Davis, J., Morenz, K. J. & Gertsch, L. Availability and delta-v requirements for delivering water extracted from near-Earth objects to cis-lunar space. Planet. Space Sci. 159 , 28–42 (2018).

Sonter, M. Near earth objects as resources for space industrialization. Sol. Syst. Dev. J. 1 , 1–31 (2001).

Zuppero, A. C. & Jacox, M. G. Near earth object fuels (neo-fuels): discovery, prospecting and use. In 43rd Congress of the International Astronautical Federation (IAF, 1992).

Sanchez, J.-P. & McInnes, C. Asteroid resource map for near-Earth space. J. Spacecr. Rockets 48 , 153–165 (2011).

Shoemaker, E. & Helin, E. Earth-approaching asteroids as targets for exploration (NASA, 1978).

Sonter, M. J. The technical and economic feasibility of mining the near-earth asteroids. Acta Astronaut. 41 , 637–647 (1997).

Gaffey, M. J. & Mccord, T. B. Asteroids: a source of natural resources for terrestrial and extra-terrestrial applications. In Abstracts of Papers Presented at a Special Session of the Seventh Annual Lunar Science Conference on Utilization of Lunar Materials and Expertise for Large Scale Operations in Space (Lunar Science Institute, 1976).

Jakus, A. E., Koube, K. D., Geisendorfer, N. R. & Shah, R. N. Robust and elastic lunar and martian structures from 3D-printed regolith inks. Sci. Rep. 7 , 1–8 (2017).

Goulas, A., Engstrøm, D. S. & Friel, R. J. Additive manufacturing using space resources. In Additive manufacturing , 661–683 (Elsevier, 2021).

Mueller, R. P. et al. Additive construction using basalt regolith fines. In Earth and Space 2014: Engineering for Extreme Environments (eds. Gertsch, L. S. & Malla, R. B.) 394–403 (ASCE, 2014).

Isachenkov, M., Chugunov, S., Akhatov, I. & Shishkovsky, I. Regolith-based additive manufacturing for sustainable development of lunar infrastructure–an overview. Acta Astronaut. 180 , 650–678 (2021).

Fateri, M. et al. Solar sintering for lunar additive manufacturing. J. Aerosp. Eng. 32 , 04019101 (2019).

Altun, A. A. et al. Additive manufacturing of lunar regolith structures. Open Ceram. 5 , 100058 (2021).

Reitz, B. et al. Additive manufacturing under lunar gravity and microgravity. Microgravity Sci. Technol. 33 , 1–12 (2021).

Labeaga-Martínez, N., Sanjurjo-Rivo, M., Díaz-Álvarez, J. & Martínez-Frías, J. Additive manufacturing for a Moon village. Procedia Manuf. 13 , 794–801 (2017).

Zocca, A. et al. Challenges in the technology development for additive manufacturing in space. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. Additive Manuf. Front . 1 , 100018 (2022).

Goulas, A., Harris, R. A. & Friel, R. J. Additive manufacturing of physical assets by using ceramic multicomponent extra-terrestrial materials. Addit. Manuf. 10 , 36–42 (2016).

Ulubeyli, S. Lunar shelter construction issues: the state-of-the-art towards 3D printing technologies. Acta Astronaut. 195 , 318–343 (2022).

Goulas, A., Binner, J. G., Harris, R. A. & Friel, R. J. Assessing extraterrestrial regolith material simulants for in-situ resource utilisation based 3D printing. Appl. Mater. Today 6 , 54–61 (2017).

Hogue, M. D., Mueller, R. P., Sibille, L., Hintze, P. E. & Rasky, D. J. Extraterrestrial regolith derived atmospheric entry heat shields. In Earth and Space 2016: Engineering for Extreme Environments (eds. Malla, R. B., Agui, J. H. & van Susante, P. J.) 699–712 (ASCE, 2016).

Hogue, M. D., Meuller, R. P., Sibille, L., Hintze, P. E. & Rasky, D. J. Regolith derived heat shield for planetary body entry and descent system with in situ fabrication . Tech. Rep., (NASA, 2012).

Horton, C. et al. First demonstration of photovoltaic diodes on lunar regolith-based substrate. Acta Astronaut. 56 , 537–545 (2005).

Waldron, R. Lunar manufacturing: a survey of products and processes. Acta Astronaut. 17 , 691–708 (1988).

Ellery, A. Generating and storing power on the moon using in situ resources. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 236 , 1045–1063 (2022).

Freundlich, A. et al. Manufacture of solar cells on the Moon. In Conference Record of the Thirty-first IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, 2005 ., 794–797 (IEEE, 2005).

Cilliers, J., Rasera, J. & Hadler, K. Estimating the scale of space resource utilisation (SRU) operations to satisfy lunar oxygen demand. Planet. Space Sci. 180 , 104749 (2020).

Hadler, K. et al. A universal framework for space resource utilisation (SRU). Planet. Space Sci . 182 , 104811 (2020).

Sour Gertsch, L. & Gertsch, R. E. Surface mine design and planning for lunar regolith production , vol. 654, 1108–1115 (American Institute of Physics, 2003).

Casanova, S. et al. Lunar polar water resource exploration–Examination of the lunar cold trap reservoir system model and introduction of play-based exploration (PBE) techniques. Planet. Space Sci. 180 , 104742 (2020).

Espejel, C. D. Lunar ore reserves standards 101 (LORS-101), a first code for the reporting of lunar exploration results, lunar resources, and lunar reserves. In Fourth International Future Mining Conference (AusIMM, 2019).

Luchsinger, K. M., Chanover, N. J. & Strycker, P. D. Water within a permanently shadowed lunar crater: Further LCROSS modeling and analysis. Icarus 354 , 114089 (2021).

Just, G., Smith, K., Joy, K. & Roy, M. Parametric review of existing regolith excavation techniques for lunar in situ resource utilisation (ISRU) and recommendations for future excavation experiments. Planet. Space Sci. 180 , 104746 (2020).

Taylor, L. A. & Carrier III, W. D. Production of oxygen on the Moon: which processes are best and why. AIAA J. 30 , 2858–2863 (1992).

Rasera, J., Cilliers, J., Lamamy, J. & Hadler, K. The beneficiation of lunar regolith for space resource utilisation: a review. Planet. Space Sci. 186 , 104879 (2020).

Taylor, G. J., Neubert, J., Lucey, P. & McCullough, E. The uncertain nature of polar lunar regolith. In Space Resources Roundtable VI , 45 (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 2004).

Taylor, S. R. Planetary science: a lunar perspective , vol. 3303 (Lunar and Planetary Institute Houston, 1982).

Ohtake, M. et al. Geologic structure generated by large-impact basin formation observed at the south pole-aitken basin on the moon. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41 , 2738–2745 (2014).

Vaniman, D., Dietrich, J., Taylor, G. J. & Heiken, G. Exploration, samples, and recent concepts of the Moon , 5–26 (Cambridge University Press Cambridge, 1991).

Jayathilake, B., Ilankoon, I. & Dushyantha, M. Assessment of significant geotechnical parameters for lunar regolith excavations. Acta Astronaut. 196 , 107–122 (2022).

Kawamoto, H. & Miwa, T. Mitigation of lunar dust adhered to mechanical parts of equipment used for lunar exploration. J. Electrost. 69 , 365–369 (2011).

Carpenter, J. D., Fisackerly, R., De Rosa, D. & Houdou, B. Scientific preparations for lunar exploration with the european lunar lander. Planet. Space Sci. 74 , 208–223 (2012).

Christoffersen, R. & Lindsay, J. F. Lunar dust effects on spacesuit systems: insights from the apollo spacesuits . Tech. Rep. (NASA, 2009).

Afshar-Mohajer, N., Wu, C.-Y., Curtis, J. S. & Gaier, J. R. Review of dust transport and mitigation technologies in lunar and martian atmospheres. Adv. Space Res. 56 , 1222–1241 (2015).

Taylor, L. A., Pieters, C. M. & Britt, D. Evaluations of lunar regolith simulants. Planet. Space Sci. 126 , 1–7 (2016).

Liu, Y. & Taylor, L. A. Characterization of lunar dust and a synopsis of available lunar simulants. Planet. Space Sci. 59 , 1769–1783 (2011).

Toklu, Y. C. & Akpinar, P. Lunar soils, simulants and lunar construction materials: an overview. Adv. Space Res. 70 , 762–779 (2022).

Sun, H., Yi, M., Shen, Z., Zhang, X. & Ma, S. Developing a new controllable lunar dust simulant: Bhld20. Planet. Space Sci. 141 , 17–24 (2017).

Kosick, G., Bennett, C. & Dobby, G. Managing company risk by incorporating the mine resource model into design and optimization of mineral processing plants . Tech. Rep., (SGS Mineral Services, 2002).

Sargeant, H. M. et al. Hydrogen reduction of lunar samples in a static system for a water production demonstration on the moon. Planet. Space Sci. 205 , 105287 (2021).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the European Space Agency (ESA) for the opportunity to contribute to the SciSpacE White Paper exercise, as well as for supporting this submission to the special issue of npj Microgravity. We would also like to thank the ESA Topical Team on ‘A complete resource production flowsheet for lunar materials’, funded by ESA Contract 4000123986/18/NL/PG.

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Jan Cilliers, Kathryn Hadler, Joshua Rasera.

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, London, SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom

Jan Cilliers, Kathryn Hadler & Joshua Rasera

European Space Resources Innovation Centre (ESRIC), Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LIST), Maison de l’Innovation, 5, avenue des Hauts-Fourneuax, Esch-sur-Alzette, L-4362, Luxembourg

Kathryn Hadler

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

J.J.C. and K.H. were responsible for developing the process background, the gap analysis, and identification of open questions, revising the paper, and general editing. J.N.R. was responsible for developing the introduction, the literature review, synthesis of literature and gaps/open questions, revising the paper structure, and general editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Cilliers .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Cilliers, J., Hadler, K. & Rasera, J. Toward the utilisation of resources in space: knowledge gaps, open questions, and priorities. npj Microgravity 9 , 22 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41526-023-00274-3

Download citation

Received : 03 August 2022

Accepted : 13 March 2023

Published : 25 March 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41526-023-00274-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Cryogenic propellant management in space: open challenges and perspectives.

• Alessia Simonini
• Michael Dreyer
• Jean-Baptiste Gouriet

npj Microgravity (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications

• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Americans’ Views of Space: U.S. Role, NASA Priorities and Impact of Private Companies

A majority of Americans (69%) say it’s essential for the U.S. to continue to be a world leader in space. As private companies become a bigger part of the industry, the public gives them more positive than negative ratings for their contributions to space exploration and spacecraft development. Still, Americans continue to say NASA has a critical role to play going forward.

Religious Americans less likely to believe intelligent life exists on other planets

In the U.S., highly religious adults are much more skeptical about the possibility of extraterrestrial life than those who are less religious.

Most Americans believe in intelligent life beyond Earth; few see UFOs as a major national security threat

About two-thirds of Americans (65%) say their best guess is that intelligent life exists on other planets.

Public Expresses Favorable Views of a Number of Federal Agencies

Americans express overwhelmingly favorable opinions of federal agencies like the Postal Service, the National Park Service, NASA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) despite historically low levels of public trust in the federal government.

How Americans see the future of space exploration, 50 years after the first moon landing

Most Americans think sending astronauts to Mars or the moon should be a lower priority for NASA – or say it should not be done at all.

As debris piles up, Americans are skeptical enough will be done to limit space junk

Thousands of space launches have spawned a massive orbital junkyard. Many Americans are doubtful private companies will keep space clean of debris.

Many in U.S. have confidence in what private space companies will accomplish

Most Americans are confident that private space companies will make meaningful contributions in developing safe and reliable spacecraft or conducting research to expand space knowledge.

Space tourism? Majority of Americans say they wouldn’t be interested

About four-in-ten Americans (42%) say they would definitely or probably be interested in orbiting the Earth in a spacecraft in the future, while roughly six-in-ten (58%) say they would not be interested.

Majority of Americans Believe It Is Essential That the U.S. Remain a Global Leader in Space

Sixty years after the founding of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), most Americans believe the United States should be at the forefront of global leadership in space exploration. Majorities say the International Space Station has been a good investment for the country and that, on balance, NASA is still vital to the future […]

Despite the increasing role of private companies in space exploration, most believe NASA’s role is still vital for future

REFINE YOUR SELECTION

• Brian Kennedy (4)
• Mark Strauss (4)
• Cary Funk (2)
• Pew Research Center Staff (2)
• Aaron Smith (1)
• Alec Tyson (1)
• Andrea Caumont (1)
• Arnold Lau (1)
• Becka A. Alper (1)
• Courtney Johnson (1)
• Courtney Kennedy (1)
• David Masci (1)
• Drew DeSilver (1)
• Joshua Alvarado (1)
• Katie Reilly (1)
• Kenneth Olmstead (1)
• Monica Anderson (1)
• Paul Hitlin (1)
• Seth Motel (1)
• Tom Rosentiel (1)

Research Teams

• Science (18)
• Internet and Technology (9)
• Politics (5)
• Methods (1)
• Religion (1)

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Transportation & Logistics ›

Space industry worldwide - statistics & facts

The global space economy , valued at around 423.8 billion U.S. dollars in 2019, includes a range of activities involved in the researching, exploring, and utilization of space. There are several ways the industry can be divided for analysis, all of which have some overlap. One such way is to distinguish between the utilization of space for communications purposes, and the research and exploration of space for scientific or commercial purposes. In 2018, communications activities (related primarily to consumer television) comprised around 26 percent of the total space economy. By 2040, this share is predicted to grow to over 50 percent as the use of satellite and other space-based technology for internet infrastructure come into use. Crossing over, but distinct from the communications segment, is the satellite segment. Satellites are often used for commercial communications, but can also relate non-commercial purposes such as military use or scientific research. Global revenue from satellites totaled 271 billion U.S. dollars in 2019, with 95 new satellites launched in that year. In recent times, the number of satellite launches has declined from the industry’s peak between the mid-1960s and late 1970’s, when an average of 128 satellites were launched per year. In 2019, there were 2,514 satellites in orbit , of which 1,327 belong to the United States . Another third way to divide the space industry for analysis is by contrasting private and government spending. In 2019, government spending comprised around 20 percent of the total global space economy, amounting to some 87 billion U.S. dollars. The United States government is the largest contributor, with NASA’s budget being over 22.5 billion dollars in 2020. Other major government players are the European Space Agency and China, however their combined spending in 2017 was only 10.7 billion dollars – just over half of NASA’s spending for the same period. Of NASA’s budget, around half is spent on space exploration , with the remainder being spent on a variety of scientific, educational, engineering and administrative functions. However, public opinion is that NASA should focus more on research, technological development and threat prevention than space exploration. In a 2018 survey, only 18 percent of U.S. adults believe that sending astronauts to Mars should be a top priority . This text provides general information. Statista assumes no liability for the information given being complete or correct. Due to varying update cycles, statistics can display more up-to-date data than referenced in the text. Show more - Description Martin Placek Research expert covering transportation and electronics Published by Martin Placek , Dec 18, 2023

Key insights

Detailed statistics

Turnover of the global space economy 2009-2021

Revenue of the global satellite industry 2006-2021

Global government investment on space exploration by type 2010-2029

Editor’s Picks Current statistics on this topic

Number of satellites in orbit - major countries 2022

Aerospace & Defense Manufacturing

Share of global satellite launches by SpaceX 2008-2020

Further recommended statistics

• Premium Statistic Turnover of the global space economy 2009-2021
• Premium Statistic Global space revenue by sector 2019-2021
• Premium Statistic Revenue of the global space economy by segment 2015-2040
• Basic Statistic Government space program spending worldwide 2014-2022
• Premium Statistic Space venture investment value worldwide by type 2000-2021
• Premium Statistic Global government investment in space exploration 2013-2027
• Premium Statistic Revenue of the global satellite industry 2006-2021
• Premium Statistic Number of satellites launched by year 1957-2019

Global turnover of the space economy from 2009 to 2021 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Global space revenue by sector 2019-2021

Global space economy from 2019 to 2021, by sector (in billion U.S. dollars)

Revenue of the global space economy by segment 2015-2040

Global space economy revenue from 2015 to 2040, by segment (in billion U.S. dollars)

Government space program spending worldwide 2014-2022

Government expenditure on space programs worldwide from 2014 to 2022 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Space venture investment value worldwide by type 2000-2021

Value of investments in space ventures worldwide from 2000 to 2021, by type (in billion U.S. dollars)

Global government investment in space exploration 2013-2027

Total global government investment in space exploration from 2013 to 2027 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Revenue of the global satellite industry from 2006 to 2021 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Number of satellites launched by year 1957-2019

Number of satellites launched from 1957 to 2019

• Premium Statistic Global government investment on space exploration by type 2010-2029
• Basic Statistic Government space program spending of the leading countries in the world 2022-2023
• Premium Statistic Turnover of European companies in the space industry 2010-2019
• Premium Statistic European Space Agency's main contributors 2022
• Premium Statistic U.S. government expenditure on space exploration 2017-2027
• Premium Statistic Number of satellites in orbit - major countries 2022
• Premium Statistic Expendable launch vehicles used in space exploration 2019

Government investment on space exploration worldwide from 2010 to 2029, by type (in billion U.S. dollars)

Government space program spending of the leading countries in the world 2022-2023

Government expenditure on space programs in 2022 and 2023, by major country (in billion U.S. dollars)

Turnover of European companies in the space industry 2010-2019

European space industry turnover from 2010 to 2019 (in billion euros)

European Space Agency's main contributors 2022

Largest contributors to the European Space Agency's budget in 2022 (in million euros)

U.S. government expenditure on space exploration 2017-2027

U.S. government expenditure on space exploration in 2017 and 2027 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Number of satellites in orbit by major country as of April 30, 2022

Expendable launch vehicles used in space exploration 2019

Number of satellites launched in space in 2019, by expendable launch vehicles (ELVs)

• Premium Statistic Budget of the leading space agencies worldwide in 2018
• Premium Statistic Revenue of the global leading aerospace and defense manufacturers 2023
• Premium Statistic Leading aerospace and defense manufacturers in the U.S. 2023
• Basic Statistic NASA - budget 2014-2025
• Premium Statistic NASA - approved budget by sector 2017-2024
• Premium Statistic U.S. largest NASA contractors FY 2022
• Premium Statistic Share of global satellite launches by SpaceX 2008-2020
• Premium Statistic European Space Agency's budget 2015-2022
• Premium Statistic ESA's budget breakdown by domain 2022
• Premium Statistic JAXA's annual budget Japan FY 2015-2024

Budget of the leading space agencies worldwide in 2018

Leading space agencies worldwide in 2018, by government space budget (in million U.S. dollars)

Revenue of the global leading aerospace and defense manufacturers 2023

Leading aerospace and defense manufacturers worldwide in 2023, based on revenue (in billion U.S. dollars)

Leading aerospace and defense manufacturers in the U.S. 2023

Leading aerospace and defense manufacturers in the U.S. in 2023, based on revenue (in billion U.S. dollars)

NASA - budget 2014-2025

NASA's budget request from 2014 to 2025 (in billion U.S. dollars)

NASA - approved budget by sector 2017-2024

NASA's approved budget from FY 2017 to FY 2024, by sector (in million U.S. dollars)

U.S. largest NASA contractors FY 2022

Leading NASA contractors in the United States in the fiscal year 2022, by contract value (in million U.S. dollars)

Share of satellite launches worldwide by SpaceX from 2008 to 2020

European Space Agency's budget 2015-2022

Budget of the European Space Agency between 2015 and 2022 (in billion euros)*

ESA's budget breakdown by domain 2022

Budget breakdown of the European Space Agency in 2022, by domain (in million euros)

JAXA's annual budget Japan FY 2015-2024

Annual budget of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) from fiscal year 2015 to 2024 (in billion Japanese yen)

Further reports

Get the best reports to understand your industry.

• European aerospace industry

Mon - Fri, 9am - 6pm (EST)

Mon - Fri, 9am - 5pm (SGT)

Mon - Fri, 10:00am - 6:00pm (JST)

Mon - Fri, 9:30am - 5pm (GMT)

Advertisement

ARBP: antibiotic-resistant bacteria propagation bio-inspired algorithm and its performance on benchmark functions

• Original Article
• Published: 06 September 2024
• Volume 4 , article number  10 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Kirti Aggarwal 1 &
• Anuja Arora   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5215-1300 1  

Optimization algorithms are continuously evolving and considered as an active multidiscipline research area to design scalable solutions for complex optimization problems. Literature witnesses the constant effort by researchers to improve existing optimization algorithms or to develop a new algorithm to deal with single and multiple objective problems. This research paper presents a novel population-based, metaheuristic bio-inspired optimization algorithm. The algorithm contrived the propagation concept of antibiotic-resistant bacteria named as antibiotic-resistant bacteria propagation (ARBP) algorithm where properties of bacteria to acquire antibiotic resistance over time are used as a base concept. The optimization algorithm imitates the two prime mechanisms of horizontal gene transfer—Conjugation Gene Transfer Mechanism (CGTM) and Transformation Gene Transfer Mechanism (TGTM) to propagate antibiotic-resistant bacteria. CGTM and TGTM are used to explore the search space to handle single and multiple objective optimization problems. Conjugation mechanism is used for exploration of search space and exploitation concept is driven by transformation mechanism. The efficiency and importance of the ARBP algorithm are validated on varying classical and complex benchmark functions. An extensive comparative study is performed to detail the effectiveness of ARBP over other well-known swarm and evolutionary algorithms. This comparative analysis clearly depicts that the performance of ARBP is superior in terms of finding a better solution with high convergence as compared to other considered algorithms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

WIGA: Wolbachia Infection Genetic Algorithm for Solving Multi-Objective Optimization Problems

An Effective Bacterial Foraging Optimization Based on Conjugation and Novel Step-Size Strategies

Manta ray foraging and Gaussian mutation-based elephant herding optimization for global optimization

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Actor JK (2011) Elsevier’s integrated review. Immunology and microbiology

Ahn CW (2006) Practical genetic algorithms. Stud Comput Intell. https://doi.org/10.1007/11543138_2

Article   Google Scholar  

Alatas B (2011) ACROA: artificial chemical reaction optimization algorithm for global optimization. Expert Syst Appl 38(10):13170–13180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.126

Arivudainambi D, Rekha D (2013) Memetic algorithm for minimum energy broadcast problem in wireless ad hoc networks. Swarm Evol Comput 12:57–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2013.04.001

Azadeh A, Seif J, Sheikhalishahi M, Yazdani M (2016) An integrated support vector regression-imperialist competitive algorithm for reliability estimation of a shearing machine. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 29(1):16–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2014.1002810

Beheshti Z, Shamsuddin SMH (2013) A review of population-based meta-heuristic algorithm GPUMLib: deep learning SOM library for surface reconstruction view project web caching view project a review of population-based Meta-Heuristic algorithm. Int J Adv Soft Comput Appl 5(1):1–35

Google Scholar  

Behnamian J, Fatemi Ghomi SMT, Jolai F, Amirtaheri O (2012) Minimizing makespan on a three-machine flowshop batch scheduling problem with transportation using genetic algorithm. Appl Soft Comput J 12(2):768–777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2011.10.015

Bennett PM (2008) Plasmid encoded antibiotic resistance: acquisition and transfer of antibiotic resistance genes in bacteria. Br J Pharmacol 153(SUPPL. 1):S347–S357. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjp.0707607

Binitha S, Sathya SS (2012) A survey of bio inspired optimization algorithms. Int J Soft Comput Eng (IJSCE) 2(2):137–151

Brown-Jaque M, Calero-Cáceres W, Muniesa M (2015) Transfer of antibiotic-resistance genes via phage-related mobile elements. Plasmid 79:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plasmid.2015.01.001

Čech M, Lampa M, Vilamová Š (2014) Ecology inspired optimization: Survey on recent and possible applications in metallurgy and proposal of taxonomy revision. METAL 2014 - 23rd international conference on metallurgy and materials, conference proceedings, pp 1635–1639

Changdar C, Mahapatra GS, Kumar Pal R (2014) An efficient genetic algorithm for multi-objective solid travelling salesman problem under fuzziness. Swarm Evol Comput 15:27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2013.11.001

Chen J, Xin B, Peng Z, Dou L, Zhang J (2009) Optimal contraction theorem for exploration-exploitation tradeoff in search and optimization. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 39(3):680–691. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCA.2009.2012436

Crepinsek M, Liu SH, Mernik M (2013) Exploration and exploitation in evolutionary algorithms: a survey. ACM Comput Surv 45(3):1–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/2480741.2480752

Dalwani S, Agarwal A (2018) Review on classification of nature inspired approach. Int J Comput Math Sci

Das S, Suganthan PN (2010) Differential evolution: a survey of the state-of-the-art. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 15(1):4–31

Das S, Biswas A, Dasgupta S, Abraham A (2009) Bacterial foraging optimization algorithm: theoretical foundations, analysis, and applications. Foundations of computational intelligence, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 23–55

Dhal KG, Ray S, Das A, Das S (2019) A survey on nature-inspired optimization algorithms and their application in image enhancement domain. Arch Comput Methods Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-018-9289-9

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Dorigo M, Birattari M, Stutzle T (2006) Ant colony optimization. IEEE Comput Intell Mag 1(4):28–39

Draa A, Bouaziz A (2014) An artificial bee colony algorithm for image contrast enhancement. Swarm Evol Comput 16:69–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2014.01.003

Fall S, Mercier A, Bertolla F, Calteau A, Gueguen L, Perrière G, Vogel TM, Simonet P (2007) Horizontal gene transfer regulation in bacteria as a “Spandrel” of DNA repair mechanisms. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001055

Fister I, Yang XS, Brest J, Fister D (2013) A brief review of nature-inspired algorithms for optimization. Elektrotehniski Vestnik/electrotechnical Rev 80(3):116–122

Fornarelli G, Giaquinto A (2013) An unsupervised multi-swarm clustering technique for image segmentation. Swarm Evol Comput 11:31–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2013.02.002

Garai G, Chaudhurii BB (2013) A novel hybrid genetic algorithm with Tabu search for optimizing multi-dimensional functions and point pattern recognition. Inf Sci 221:28–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2012.09.012

Gill PE, Murray W, Wright MH (2019) Practical optimization. Society for industrial and applied mathematics. https://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/10.1137/1.9781611975604.fm

Goldansaz SM, Jolai F, Zahedi Anaraki AH (2013) A hybrid imperialist competitive algorithm for minimizing makespan in a multi-processor open shop. Appl Math Model 37(23):9603–9616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.05.002

Golberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison Wesley

Griffiths AJF (2000) Tetrad—an introduction to genetic analysis. NCBI Bookshelf, 860. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21878/def-item/A5444/ . Accessed Mar 2020

Grohmann E, Muth G, Espinosa M (2003) Conjugative plasmid transfer in Gram-Positive bacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 67(2):277–301. https://doi.org/10.1128/mmbr.67.2.277-301.2003

Hatamlou A (2013) Black hole: a new heuristic optimization approach for data clustering. Inf Sci 222:175–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2012.08.023

Hofmann J, Limmer S, Fey D (2013) Performance investigations of genetic algorithms on graphics cards. Swarm Evol Comput 12:33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2013.04.003

Holland JH (1992) Genetic algorithms. JSTOR 267(1):66–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/24939139

Hosseini HS (2011) Principal components analysis by the galaxy-based search algorithm: a novel metaheuristic for continuous optimisation. Int J Comput Sci Eng 6(1/2):132. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijcse.2011.041221

Jheeta S (2013) Horizontal gene transfer and its part in the reorganisation of genetics during the LUCA epoch. In Life (Vol. 3, Issue 4, pp 518–523). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/life3040518

Karaboga D, Basturk B (2007) Artificial bee colony (ABC) optimization algorithm for solving constrained optimization problems. Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics), 4529 LNAI, 789–798. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72950-1_77

Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) A novel heuristic optimization method: charged system search. Acta Mech 213(3–4):267–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-009-0270-4

Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of ICNN'95-international conference on neural networks (Vol. 4, pp 1942–1948). IEEE

Koza JR (1992) Genetic programming: on the programming of computers. Means of natural selection

Layegh J, Jolai F (2010) A memetic algorithm for minimizing the total weighted completion time on a single machine under linear deterioration. Appl Math Model 34(10):2910–2925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2010.01.002

Liu HC, Huang JS (1998) Pattern recognition using evolution algorithms with fast simulated annealing. Pattern Recogn Lett 19(5–6):403–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8655(98)00025-7

Ludwig SA (2013) Memetic algorithms applied to the optimization of workflow compositions. Swarm Evol Comput 10:31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2012.12.001

Lynn N, Suganthan PN (2015) Heterogeneous comprehensive learning particle swarm optimization with enhanced exploration and exploitation. Swarm Evol Comput 24:11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2015.05.002

Malviya R, Pratihar DK (2011) Tuning of neural networks using particle swarm optimization to model MIG welding process. Swarm Evol Comput 1(4):223–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.07.001

Manikandan P, Ramyachitra D (2017) Bacterial foraging optimization–genetic algorithm for multiple sequence alignment with multi-objectives. Sci Rep 7(1):1–14

Mehrabian AR, Lucas C (2006) A novel numerical optimization algorithm inspired from weed colonization. Eco Inform 1(4):355–366

Meysam Mousavi S, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Vahdani B, Hashemi H, Sanjari MJ (2013) A new support vector model-based imperialist competitive algorithm for time estimation in new product development projects. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf 29(1):157–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2012.04.006

Mirjalili S, Lewis A (2016) The Whale optimization algorithm. Adv Eng Softw 95:51–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.01.008

Nanda SJ, Panda G (2014) A survey on nature inspired metaheuristic algorithms for partitional clustering. Swarm Evol Comput 16:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2013.11.003

Opal SM, Pop-Vicas A (2015) Molecular mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in bacteria. In: Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s principles and practice of infectious diseases. WB Saunders, pp 235–251

Panda R, Naik MK, Panigrahi BK (2011) Face recognition using bacterial foraging strategy. Swarm Evol Comput 1(3):138–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.06.001

Passino KM (2002) Biomimicry of bacterial foraging for distributed optimization and control. IEEE Control Syst Mag. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCS.2002.1004010

Rashedi E, Nezamabadi-Pour H, Saryazdi S (2009) GSA: a gravitational search algorithm. Inf Sci 179(13):2232–2248

Rechenberg I (1978) Evolutionsstrategien. In: Simulationsmethoden in der Medizin und Biologie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 83–114

Sabtu N, Enoch DA, Brown NM (2015) Antibiotic resistance: what, why, where, when and how? Br Med Bull 116(1):105–113. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldv041

Saraswat M, Arya KV, Sharma H (2013) Leukocyte segmentation in tissue images using differential evolution algorithm. Swarm Evol Comput 11:46–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2013.02.003

Senthilnath J, Omkar SN, Mani V (2011) Clustering using firefly algorithm: performance study. Swarm Evol Comput 1(3):164–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.06.003

Siddique N, Adeli H (2015) Nature inspired computing: an overview and some future directions. Cogn Comput 7(6):706–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-015-9370-8

Soltani R, Jolai F, Zandieh M (2010) Two robust meta-heuristics for scheduling multiple job classes on a single machine with multiple criteria. Expert Syst Appl 37(8):5951–5959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.009

Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution - a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 11(4):341–359. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328

Suganthan PN (2002) Structural pattern recognition using genetic algorithms. Pattern Recogn 35(9):1883–1893. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-3203(01)00136-4

Sundar S, Singh A (2012) A swarm intelligence approach to the early/tardy scheduling problem. Swarm Evol Comput 4:25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.12.002

Suresh K, Kumarappan N (2013) Hybrid improved binary particle swarm optimization approach for generation maintenance scheduling problem. Swarm Evol Comput 9:69–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2012.11.003

Tan KC, Chiam SC, Mamun AA, Goh CK (2009) Balancing exploration and exploitation with adaptive variation for evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Eur J Oper Res 197(2):701–713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.07.025

Wolpert DH, Macready WG (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.585893

Yang XS (2014) Nature-inspired optimization algorithms. Elsevier, Amsterdam

Yang XS, Deb S (2010) Cuckoo search via levy flights. Ieeexplore. IEEE.Org, 210–214. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5393690/ . Accessed Mar 2020

Yang XS, Gandomi AH (2012) Bat algorithm: a novel approach for global engineering optimization. Eng Comput (swansea, Wales) 29(5):464–483. https://doi.org/10.1108/02644401211235834

Zhao W, Wang L, Zhang Z (2019) Artificial ecosystem-based optimization: a novel nature-inspired meta-heuristic algorithm. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04452-x

Download references

To perform this research work, no funding has been received from any funding source/organization.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of CSE and IT, Jaypee Institute of Information Technology, Noida, India

Kirti Aggarwal & Anuja Arora

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Both authors have made substantial contributions in the presented research work and have approved the submitted manuscript. Both authors agree to be personally accountable for the contributions and ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirti Aggarwal .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they do not have any conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Research does not involve human participants or animals.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Aggarwal, K., Arora, A. ARBP: antibiotic-resistant bacteria propagation bio-inspired algorithm and its performance on benchmark functions. Adv. in Comp. Int. 4 , 10 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43674-024-00077-3

Download citation

Received : 14 April 2022

Revised : 27 October 2023

Accepted : 26 July 2024

Published : 06 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43674-024-00077-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Antibiotic-resistant bacteria
• Metaheuristic
• Bio-inspired algorithm
• Optimization algorithm
• Evolutionary algorithm
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research