Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Autonomous Systems”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗
NASA NTRS2011

Systems, methods and apparatus for generation and verification of policies in autonomic computing systems

Described herein is a method that produces fully (mathematically) tractable development of policies for autonomic systems from requirements through to code generation. This method is illustrated through an example showing how user formulated policies can be translated into a formal mode which can then be converted to code. The requirements-based programming method described provides faster, higher quality development and maintenance of autonomic systems based on user formulation of policies.Further, the systems, methods and apparatus described herein provide a way of analyzing policies for autonomic systems and facilities the generation of provably correct implementations automatically, which in turn provides reduced development time, reduced testing requirements, guarantees of correctness of the implementation with respect to the policies specified at the outset, and provides a higher degree of confidence that the policies are both complete and reasonable. The ability to specify the policy for the management of a system and then automatically generate an equivalent implementation greatly improves the quality of software, the survivability of future missions, in particular when the system will operate untended in very remote environments, and greatly reduces development lead times and costs.

Hinchey, Michael G.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Development of a Commercially Viable, Modular Autonomous Robotic Systems for Converting any Vehicle to Autonomous Control

A Modular Autonomous Robotic System (MARS), consisting of a modular autonomous vehicle control system that can be retrofit on to any vehicle to convert it to autonomous control and support a modular payload for multiple applications is being developed. The MARS design is scalable, reconfigurable, and cost effective due to the use of modern open system architecture design methodologies, including serial control bus technology to simplify system wiring and enhance scalability. The design is augmented with modular, object oriented (C++) software implementing a hierarchy of five levels of control including teleoperated, continuous guidepath following, periodic guidepath following, absolute position autonomous navigation, and relative position autonomous navigation. The present effort is focused on producing a system that is commercially viable for routine autonomous patrolling of known, semistructured environments, like environmental monitoring of chemical and petroleum refineries, exterior physical security and surveillance, perimeter patrolling, and intrafacility transport applications.

guidepath position navigation control system↗
DOE OSTI2025

A2SD: Accelerating Scientific Innovation Through Autonomous Discovery Systems

The 2025 Advancing Autonomous Scientific Discovery (A2SD) workshop convened researchers from academia, national laboratories, and industry to explore the transformative role of autonomy in scientific discovery. The workshop highlighted a convergence of artificial intelligence, robotics, and computational workflows into autonomous systems capable of accelerating the scientific process. Presentations and discussions spanned autonomous experimentation, intelligent workflow orchestration, digital twins, and agent-based systems for managing complex research ecosystems. Key challenges discussed included interoperability across heterogeneous infrastructures, near real-time data management under FAIR principles, reproducibility, and the integration of human oversight. The workshop also emphasized the need for modular software interfaces, federated learning models, and education initiatives to support a next-generation scientific workforce.

Taufer, Michela [University of Tennessee, Knoxvill↗
NASA NTRS2013

Autonomous Formations of Multi-Agent Systems

Autonomous formation control of multi-agent dynamic systems has a number of applications that include ground-based and aerial robots and satellite formations. For air vehicles, formation flight ("flocking") has the potential to significantly increase airspace utilization as well as fuel efficiency. This presentation addresses two main problems in multi-agent formations: optimal role assignment to minimize the total cost (e.g., combined distance traveled by all agents); and maintaining formation geometry during flock motion. The Kuhn-Munkres ("Hungarian") algorithm is used for optimal assignment, and consensus-based leader-follower type control architecture is used to maintain formation shape despite the leader s independent movements. The methods are demonstrated by animated simulations.

Dhali, Sanjana↗
NASA NTRS1992

Autonomous power system brassboard

The Autonomous Power System (APS) brassboard is a 20 kHz power distribution system which has been developed at NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio. The brassboard exists to provide a realistic hardware platform capable of testing artificially intelligent (AI) software. The brassboard's power circuit topology is based upon a Power Distribution Control Unit (PDCU), which is a subset of an advanced development 20 kHz electrical power system (EPS) testbed, originally designed for Space Station Freedom (SSF). The APS program is designed to demonstrate the application of intelligent software as a fault detection, isolation, and recovery methodology for space power systems. This report discusses both the hardware and software elements used to construct the present configuration of the brassboard. The brassboard power components are described. These include the solid-state switches (herein referred to as switchgear), transformers, sources, and loads. Closely linked to this power portion of the brassboard is the first level of embedded control. Hardware used to implement this control and its associated software is discussed. An Ada software program, developed by Lewis Research Center's Space Station Freedom Directorate for their 20 kHz testbed, is used to control the brassboard's switchgear, as well as monitor key brassboard parameters through sensors located within these switches. The Ada code is downloaded from a PC/AT, and is resident within the 8086 microprocessor-based embedded controllers. The PC/AT is also used for smart terminal emulation, capable of controlling the switchgear as well as displaying data from them. Intelligent control is provided through use of a T1 Explorer and the Autonomous Power Expert (APEX) LISP software. Real-time load scheduling is implemented through use of a 'C' program-based scheduling engine. The methods of communication between these computers and the brassboard are explored. In order to evaluate the features of both the brassboard hardware and intelligent controlling software, fault circuits have been developed and integrated as part of the brassboard. A description of these fault circuits and their function is included. The brassboard has become an extremely useful test facility, promoting artificial intelligence (AI) applications for power distribution systems. However, there are elements of the brassboard which could be enhanced, thus improving system performance. Modifications and enhancements to improve the brassboard's operation are discussed.

Merolla, Anthony↗
NASA NTRS2016

Autonomous Operations System: Development and Application

Autonomous control systems provides the ability of self-governance beyond the conventional control system. As the complexity of mechanical and electrical systems increases, there develops a natural drive for developing robust control systems to manage complicated operations. By closing the bridge between conventional automated systems to knowledge based self-awareness systems, nominal control of operations can evolve into relying on safe critical mitigation processes to support any off-nominal behavior. Current research and development efforts lead by the Autonomous Propellant Loading (APL) group at NASA Kennedy Space Center aims to improve cryogenic propellant transfer operations by developing an automated control and health monitoring system. As an integrated systems, the center aims to produce an Autonomous Operations System (AOS) capable of integrating health management operations with automated control to produce a fully autonomous system.

Autonomous Control Systems↗
NASA NTRS1992

Autonomous power system: Integrated scheduling

The Autonomous Power System (APS) project at NASA Lewis Research Center is designed to demonstrate the abilities of integrated intelligent diagnosis, control and scheduling techniques to space power distribution hardware. The project consists of three elements: the Autonomous Power Expert System (APEX) for fault diagnosis, isolation, and recovery (FDIR), the Autonomous Intelligent Power Scheduler (AIPS) to determine system configuration, and power hardware (Brassboard) to simulate a space-based power system. Faults can be introduced into the Brassboard and in turn, be diagnosed and corrected by APEX and AIPS. The Autonomous Intelligent Power Scheduler controls the execution of loads attached to the Brassboard. Each load must be executed in a manner that efficiently utilizes available power and satisfies all load, resource, and temporal constraints. In the case of a fault situation on the Brassboard, AIPS dynamically modifies the existing schedule in order to resume efficient operation conditions. A database is kept of the power demand, temporal modifiers, priority of each load, and the power level of each source. AIPS uses a set of heuristic rules to assign start times and resources to each load based on load and resource constraints. A simple improvement engine based upon these heuristics is also available to improve the schedule efficiency. This paper describes the operation of the Autonomous Intelligent Power Scheduler as a single entity, as well as its integration with APEX and the Brassboard. Future plans are discussed for the growth of the Autonomous Intelligent Power Scheduler.

Ringer, Mark J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

IPv6 Test Bed for Testing Aeronautical Applications

Aviation industries in United States and in Europe are undergoing a major paradigm shift in the introduction of new network technologies. In the US, NASA is also actively investigating the feasibility of IPv6 based networks for the aviation needs of the United States. In Europe, the Eurocontrol lead, Internet Protocol for Aviation Exchange (iPAX) Working Group is actively investigating the various ways of migrating the aviation authorities backbone infrastructure from X.25 based networks to an IPv6 based network. For the last 15 years, the global aviation community has pursued the development and implementation of an industry-specific set of communications standards known as the Aeronautical Telecommunications Network (ATN). These standards are now beginning to affect the emerging military Global Air Traffic Management (GATM) community as well as the commercial air transport community. Efforts are continuing to gain a full understanding of the differences and similarities between ATN and Internet architectures as related to Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) infrastructure choices. This research paper describes the implementation of the IPv6 test bed at NASA GRC, and Computer Networks & Software, Inc. and these two test beds are interface to Eurocontrol over the IPv4 Internet. This research work looks into the possibility of providing QoS performance for Aviation application in an IPv6 network as is provided in an ATN based network. The test bed consists of three autonomous systems. The autonomous system represents CNS domain, NASA domain and a EUROCONTROL domain. The primary mode of connection between CNS IPv6 testbed and NASA and EUROCONTROL IPv6 testbed is initially a set of IPv6 over IPv4 tunnels. The aviation application under test (CPDLC) consists of two processes running on different IPv6 enabled machines.

Wilkins, Ryan↗
NASA NTRS2024

Autonomy to Enable NASA Missions from Aeronautics to Space

2024 ASCEND Call for Sessions Session Format: Panel Session Topic: Space Exploration and Infrastructure: Exploring, Living, and Working in Space (The panel must map to one of six Session Topics - https://www.ascend.events/presenters/call-for-sessions/#sessiontopics) Title: Autonomy to Enable NASA Missions from Aeronautics to Space Short Session Description: In this panel discussion the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will discuss the role that autonomy and Artificial Intelligence (AI) will play as humanity moves off-world. Recent advances in general autonomy tools are changing the way NASA and its partners leverage autonomy for its air and space initiatives, including Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) concepts and potential lunar and Martian operations. The panelists will consist of autonomy subject matter experts familiar with the current state of the art for autonomy across both aeronautical and space domains. They will discuss how those technologies could evolve as operations become more complex and which autonomy technologies can be used in both the space and aeronautical domains. For example, perhaps autonomy work originally developed for terrestrial applications, like Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), could be applied to off-world lunar and Martian applications and vice versa. Additionally, the panel will address common misconceptions of these technologies, obstacles to implementation, and possible solutions for overcoming those obstacles. Join NASA in exploring how research activities can align to streamline autonomy development efforts, advancing NASA's goals to expand humanity's reach beyond Earth for the benefit of all. Contact Information: • Dr. Adam Yingling • Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) • Adam.j.yingling@nasa.gov, 703-416-9129 Session Length: 1.25 hours, 75 minutes Extended Description: Moderator: Dr. Adam Yingling, NASA, Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy Panel Speakers: • Autonomy Forum Principals o Dr. Charles Norton, Deputy Chief Technologist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) o Dr. Carolyn Mercer, Chief Technologist, Space Mission Directorate (SMD) o Dr. Parimal Kopardekar (PK), Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Integration Manager o Danette Alan, NASA, Senior Leader for Autonomous Systems, Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) o Duane Armstrong, Intelligent Systems Lead, Autonomous Systems Laboratory (ASL) Panel Format: • Introduction (10 min): The panel moderator will provide a 10-minute session introduction that will include an overview NASA’s Moon to Mars architecture, AAM autonomy research, and an introduction of the principals as panel speakers. • Moderated Session Part 1 (30 min): There will be a 30-minute moderated session among the moderator and the five autonomy principals to discuss the current state of art for autonomy and how work developed in one domain may be applicable to other domains; including the merits and challenges for implementing those technologies. • Moderated Session Part 2 (25 min): The moderator will then ask the principals to consider how technologies developed across all the domains might be able to address the most salient challenges identified in the previous session. • Q&A (10 min): The session will conclude with 10-minutes of audience Q&A. Session Goals and Outcomes: The session goals are 1) to communicate the importance of autonomy for both aeronautical and space mission, 2) Investigate potential synergies across autonomy research efforts that will enable scalable operations, and 3) to receive community feedback as NASA leverages autonomy to evolve aviation on Earth and enable humanity to live and work off-world.

Aerospace↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design, Formalization, and Verification of Decision Making for Intelligent Systems

The development of autonomous systems requires a rigorous process that can guarantee a system’s reliability in critical applications. At its core, an autonomous system bases its behavior on a well-defined decision making system. In this paper, we present a methodological basis for the design, formalization and formal verification of Decision Making systems for autonomous agents. The approach is generally applicable to operational objectives that can be functionally decomposed and subsequently represented as Hierarchical Finite State Machines. As a case study, we present the application of this method to implement a Decision Making model in Simulink. Furthermore, we present how we use NASA’s FRET tool to write requirements in structured natural language and generate formal specifications that can be automatically digested by NASA’s CoCoSim tool. Finally, we present how, by leveraging CoCoSim, we perform formal verification against the Simulink model and present analysis results.

Model-based development↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design, Formalization, and Verification of Decision Making for Intelligent Systems

The development of autonomous systems requires a rigorous process that can guarantee a system’s reliability in critical applications. At its core, an autonomous system bases its behavior on a well-defined decision making system. In this paper, we present a methodological basis for the design, formalization and formal verification of Decision Making systems for autonomous agents. The approach is generally applicable to operational objectives that can be functionally decomposed and subsequently represented as Hierarchical Finite State Machines. As a case study, we present the application of this method to implement a Decision Making model in Simulink. Furthermore, we present how we use NASA’s FRET tool to write requirements in structured natural language and generate formal specifications that can be automatically digested by NASA’s CoCoSim tool. Finally, we present how, by leveraging CoCoSim, we perform formal verification against the Simulink model and present analysis results.

Model-based development↗
NASA NTRS1991

Autonomous power system intelligent diagnosis and control

The Autonomous Power System (APS) project at NASA Lewis Research Center is designed to demonstrate the abilities of integrated intelligent diagnosis, control, and scheduling techniques to space power distribution hardware. Knowledge-based software provides a robust method of control for highly complex space-based power systems that conventional methods do not allow. The project consists of three elements: the Autonomous Power Expert System (APEX) for fault diagnosis and control, the Autonomous Intelligent Power Scheduler (AIPS) to determine system configuration, and power hardware (Brassboard) to simulate a space based power system. The operation of the Autonomous Power System as a whole is described and the responsibilities of the three elements - APEX, AIPS, and Brassboard - are characterized. A discussion of the methodologies used in each element is provided. Future plans are discussed for the growth of the Autonomous Power System.

Ringer, Mark J.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Autonomous Power System intelligent diagnosis and control

The Autonomous Power System (APS) project at NASA Lewis Research Center is designed to demonstrate the abilities of integrated intelligent diagnosis, control, and scheduling techniques to space power distribution hardware. Knowledge-based software provides a robust method of control for highly complex space-based power systems that conventional methods do not allow. The project consists of three elements: the Autonomous Power Expert System (APEX) for fault diagnosis and control, the Autonomous Intelligent Power Scheduler (AIPS) to determine system configuration, and power hardware (Brassboard) to simulate a space based power system. The operation of the Autonomous Power System as a whole is described and the responsibilities of the three elements - APEX, AIPS, and Brassboard - are characterized. A discussion of the methodologies used in each element is provided. Future plans are discussed for the growth of the Autonomous Power System.

Ringer, Mark J.↗