Valuing life detection missions

Recent discoveries imply that Early Mars was habitable for life-as-we-know-it; that Enceladus might be habitable; and that many stars have Earth-sized exoplanets whose insolation favors surface liquid water. These exciting discoveries make it more likely that spacecraft now under construction - Mars 2020, ExoMars rover, JWST, Europa Clipper - will find habitable, or formerly habitable, environments. Did these environments see life? Given finite resources (\$10bn/decade for the US ), how could we best test the hypothesis of a second origin of life? Here, we first state the case for and against flying life detection missions soon. Next, we assume that life detection missions will happen soon, and propose a framework for comparing the value of different life detection missions: Scientific value = (Reach x grasp x certainty x payoff) / \$ After discussing each term in this framework, we conclude that scientific value is maximized if life detection missions are flown as hypothesis tests. With hypothesis testing, even a nondetection is scientifically valuable.
Accepted by "Astrobiology."