Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Hooke, Melissa

Publications and source records attributed to Hooke, Melissa.

7 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2022

COMPACT KNN V2: Analogy-Based Cost Estimation Model for CubeSats

The CubeSat Or Microsat Probabilistic and AnalogiesCost Tool, or COMPACT, is a NASA Headquarters fundedeffort to fill the gap in cost estimating capabilities for CubeSats,as well as other microsat spacecraft. The COMPACT team hasfocused mainly on CubeSats to date, and has collected technical,programmatic and cost data on dozens of flown CubeSatsmissions led by NASA, research labs, and universities. In late2019, the team released the first tool prototype which uses a nonparametricregression technique, k-Nearest Neighbors (KNN),on actual data from historical CubeSat missions to produceearly ballpark analogy-based cost estimates for new CubeSatconcepts. Since the KNN prototype was first released, theCOMPACT team has normalized 17 new missions to be addedto the model in COMPACT V2. COMPACT V2 also featureschanges to the KNN tool algorithm including the introduction ofPrincipal Component Analysis (PCA) to the model developmentprocess and changes to the input parameters which have madethe analogy results more intuitive and have improved modelperformance. This paper describes the current COMPACTKNN dataset, improvements made to the model in COMPACTV2, an assessment of current model performance, and a forwardlook at COMPACT’s planned future enhancements.

Hooke, Melissa↗
NASA NTRS2022

Gaussian Process Regression Method for Costing SmallSat Bus Capabilities

NASA is responding to the growing interest in, andcapabilities of, small satellites for science applications with an increasingnumber and frequency of Announcements of Opportunityfor small satellite space missions. Estimating the probabilitythat these mission concepts will fit within the small cost capsof these opportunities is largely driven by the probability thatone of the burgeoning number of small satellite providers will beable to meet the payload’s accommodation requirements withinthe budget for the spacecraft. JPL has collected a databasecontaining technical specifications and cost of commerciallyavailable Smallsat buses across various vendors. The primarypurpose of the database is for use in JPL’s Team X architecturestudies to inform cost estimates of a spacecraft bus which fitsthe customer’s technical requirements for their payload andmission. Customer needs are often unique and don’t alignperfectly with an off-the-shelf commercial spacecraft bus, whichmotivates the need to develop a cost model across the continuoustechnical parameter space.Al’s Bus Cost Distribution Estimator (ABCDE) uses Gaussianprocess regression (GPR) to predict commercial Smallsat spacecraftbus cost based on a subset of a customer’s technicalrequirements (payload mass, payload power, delta V, pointingcontrol, and downlink rate). GPR is implemented in ABCDE asa Bayesian method which fits an implied multivariate regressionon the technical parameters and uses kriging to intentionally“overfit” the residuals. Overfitting the residuals allows costestimates to collapse in uncertainty closer to the data pointswhile maintaining larger uncertainty intervals in regions of parameterspace with fewer data records. The data used to fit thismodel is sensitive and represents cost estimates for off-the-shelfcommercial buses. GPR simultaneously protects the sensitivityof the database and uses the sparse nature of the database toaccount for uncertainty in cost in a useful way. For a givenset of customer technical requirements, the tool provides a costestimate distribution, the percentiles of which can be interpretedas a confidence level of finding a commercial bus under a specifiedcost cap. ABCDE dramatically pushes the boundaries ofspacecraft cost estimation models due to its Bayesian methodology(accounting for the maximum uncertainty in the underlyingregression), the mathematically advanced kriging methodology,and the novelty of its application in Team X architecture tradestudies.

Austin, Alex↗
NASA NTRS2021

Online NASA Software Estimating Tools (ONSET): A Suite of Web-Based Cost Analysis Tools

This paper provides an overview of ONSET theOnline NASA Software Estimating Tools suite of web-basedcosts analysis tools. ONSET is comprised of the AnalogySoftware Cost Tool (ASCoT) [1], and the CubeSat Or MicrosatProbabilistic and Analogies Cost Tool (COMPACT) [2]. TheOnline NASA Space Estimation Tool (ONSET) has beendeveloped to provide a standardized platform for hosting webbasedNASA cost estimation tools on NASA ONCE (OneNASA Cost Engineering). It evolved from the BETA version ofASCoT (The NASA Analogy Software Cost Tool) which wasreleased in 2017 and was presented at the 2017 IEEEAerospace Conference. This first release of ONSET contains anew version of ASCoT as well as the first official release ofCOMPACT (CubeSat Or Microsat Probabilistic + AnalogiesCost Tool). In this paper we will provide an overview ofONSET, all its features and a high-level summary of bothASCoT and COMPACT. The heart of both tools arealgorithms for analogy-based estimation based on system levelinputs.

Johnson, James↗
NASA NTRS2019

ASCot, the NASA Analogy Software Cost Tool Suite: expanding our estimation horizons

The NASA Analogy Software Costing Tool Suite (ASCoT) consists of a cluster-based analogy estimator for estimating software development effort, a K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) analogy estimator for estimating effort and delivered lines of code, a simple regression-based cost estimating relationship (CER) model that estimates cost in dollars, and a probabilistic version of COCOMO II. In this paper we document the analogy algorithms as well as summarize the results of the performance of the KNN and the principle components (PCA) cluster analogy models. KNN performance is assessed by varying the number of inputs and number of neighbors. Four different clustering methods: K-means, Spectral Clustering, Hierarchical Clustering, and Principle Components Analysis (PCA), and their respective evaluation criterion are described in detail. The comparative performance of all four estimation models is assessed using magnitude of relative error (MRE) measurements.

Menzies, Tim↗