{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019944341372912802, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013914656771799629, 'mean_word_length': 5.783018867924528, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Exercise Countermeasure Hardware Evolution on ISS: The First Decade.

The hardware systems necessary to support exercise countermeasures to the deconditioning associated with microgravity exposure have evolved and improved significantly during the first decade of the International Space Station (ISS), resulting in both new types of hardware and enhanced performance capabilities for initial hardware items. The original suite of countermeasure hardware supported the first crews to arrive on the ISS and the improved countermeasure system delivered in later missions continues to serve the astronauts today with increased efficacy. Due to aggressive hardware development schedules and constrained budgets, the initial approach was to identify existing spaceflight-certified exercise countermeasure equipment, when available, and modify it for use on the ISS. Program management encouraged the use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware, or hardware previously developed (heritage hardware) for the Space Shuttle Program. However, in many cases the resultant hardware did not meet the additional requirements necessary to support crew health maintenance during long-duration missions (3 to 12 mo) and anticipated future utilization activities in support of biomedical research. Hardware development was further complicated by performance requirements that were not fully defined at the outset and tended to evolve over the course of design and fabrication. Modifications, ranging from simple to extensive, were necessary to meet these evolving requirements in each case where heritage hardware was proposed. Heritage hardware was anticipated to be inherently reliable without the need for extensive ground testing, due to its prior positive history during operational spaceflight utilization. As a result, developmental budgets were typically insufficient and schedules were too constrained to permit long-term evaluation of dedicated ground-test units ("fleet leader" type testing) to identify reliability issues when applied to long-duration use. In most cases, the exercise unit with the most operational history was the unit installed on the ISS.