New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

To Fight Fake News, SETI Researchers Update Alien-Detection Scale

 Dubbed Rio 2.0, the scale seeks to measure how important any potential signal from aliens might be

This artist’s illustration gives an impression of how common planets are around the stars in the Milky Way. Could alien civilizations be lurking on some of our galaxy’s habitable worlds?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Researchers looking for signals from technologically advanced aliens pick up countless strange pings—but so far, nothing has convinced them that a message really came from aliens.

But that doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of overblown media headlines about potential alien detections. So a team of researchers pursuing the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, has decided to revive a scale meant to ground these detections in reality. They shared their scale, called Rio 2.0, in a new paper that takes aim at SETI researchers and the media for irresponsible coverage of potential detections.

“It’s absolutely crucial that when we talk about something so hugely significant as the discovery of intelligent life beyond the Earth, we do it clearly and carefully,” lead author Duncan Forgan, a SETI scientist at the University of St Andrews in the U.K., said in a statement from the SETI Institute. “Having Rio 2.0 allows us to rank a signal quickly in a way that the general public can easily understand, and helps us keep their trust in a world filled with fake news.” [13 Ways to Hunt Intelligent Aliens]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The new study builds on a similar effort, called the Rio Scale, which was developed in 2000 and was presented at the 51st International Astronautical Congress held in Rio de Janeiro the next year. But since the original scale was developed, SETI scientists have decided that the evaluation needed some updating, particularly given the breakneck pace of online media.

The new version of the scale creates the same output: a score ranging from 0 to 10 meant to convey the importance of a signal detection, with 0 representing a detection of no importance and 10 indicating one of extraordinary importance.

But the new research proposes tweaking the way that score is calculated to try to make it a better representation of the factors that determine a detection’s true significance and to make the tool easier for scientists to use to evaluate their own signals and those of their colleagues. That initial score is then meant to be revised as additional data are gathered, the researchers explained.

The co-authors of the new research, who include some of the same people behind the 2001 scale, hope that reviving the scale will help the public and the media evaluate the importance of a signal—sort of like the alien equivalent of the Richter scale, co-author Jill Tarter, a SETI researcher based at the SETI Institute, said in the statement.

“The SETI community is attempting to create a scale that can accompany reports of any claims of the detection of extraterrestrial intelligence and be refined over time as more data become available,” Tarter said. “This scale should convey both the significance and credibility of the claimed detection.”

The research was described in a paper published July 24 in the International Journal of Astrobiology, and the researchers have set up an online calculatorto produce the scores.

So far, the scientists wrote, the majority of the detections they’ve run through the calculator have come back with a score of 0, which means it’s still much too early to get excited about alien communications.

Copyright 2018 SPACE.com, a Purch company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Meghan Bartels is a science journalist based in New York City. She was previously a senior reporter at Scientific American. Before that she spent more than four years as a writer and editor at Space.com, as well as nearly a year as a science reporter at Newsweek, where she focused on space and Earth science. Her writing has also appeared in Audubon, Nautilus, Astronomy and Smithsonian, among other publications. She attended Georgetown University and earned a master’s degree in journalism at New York University’s Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program.

More by Meghan Bartels

SPACE.com is the premier source of space exploration, innovation and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.

More by SPACE.com

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe