Validation of Multi-Frame PIV Image Interrogation Algorithms in the Spectral Domain.
Abstract not provided.
Beresh, Steven↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “algorithmic”
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.
Standardized Algorithm Documentation for Improved Scientific Data Understanding: The Algorithm Publication Tool Prototype
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Kaylin Bugbee↗
Investigating the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm?s Advantage over Classical Algorithms.
Abstract not provided.
Ryan-Anderson, Ciaran↗
AOT Data Assimilation Algorithm: Parameter Recovery, Applications, and a Nonlinear Algorithm
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Carlson, Elizabeth Anne↗
Multi-channel Imager Algorithm (MIA): A novel cloud-top phase classification algorithm
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Modified Closures in Monte Carlo Algorithms for Diffusive Binary Stochastic Media Transport Problems
In a stochastic medium, the material properties at a given spatial location are known only statistically. The most common approach to solving particle transport problems involving binary stochastic media (BSM) is to use the atomic mix approximation in which the transport problem is solved using homogenized (volume-averaged) material properties. A common deterministic model developed for solving BSM particle transport problems is the Levermore-Pomraning (LP) model. Zimmerman and Adams proposed a Monte Carlo algorithm (Algorithm A) that solves the LP equations and another Monte Carlo algorithm (Algorithm B) that locally preserves the sampled material realization; we refer to these Monte Carlo algorithms as the LP and LPLRP (LP local realization preserving) algorithms, respectively. One-dimensional (1D) planar geometry benchmark studies have shown that the LPLRP algorithm is often significantly more accurate than the LP algorithm for problems with an incident angular flux as well as for problems with an interior source. The LPLRP algorithm implementation in these benchmark comparisons made explicit use of the one-dimensional nature of the problem. The LP model is derived by assuming an 'upwind' closure in the coupling term relating the two materials in a binary stochastic medium. Su and Pomraning developed a modified form of this closure by considering the small correlation length limit and requiring the modified closure to produce the correct exponential decay for a source-free half-line albedo problem in rod geometry. They concluded that the modified closure is generally not inferior to the LP closure and in some cases is significantly better. Brantley investigated the use of the Su-Pomraning (SP) closure in the Monte Carlo LP algorithm (LP-SP) for the suite of benchmark problems and concluded that 1) the LP-SP algorithm was somewhat more accurate overall than the LP algorithm and somewhat less accurate overall than the LPLRP algorithm for an incident angular flux benchmark suite, and 2) the LP-SP algorithm was generally the least accurate of the algorithms for an interior source benchmark suite. Larsen et al. performed an asymptotic analysis of the transport equation in 1D planar geometry for the situation in which the physical system is 1) a random binary stochastic medium with material macroscopic total cross sections and mean slab width values of O(1) or smaller and 2) optically thick with weak absorption and sources at each spatial point and therefore globally diffusive. The asymptotic analysis demonstrates that, under these assumptions, the transport equation limits to the conventional diffusion equation with atomically-mixed (volume-averaged) material properties. Larsen et al. also demonstrate that, under these same assumptions, the LP equations asymptotically limit to an atomically-mixed diffusion equation with a diffusion coefficient that is too large, leading to an unphysical flattening of the ensemble-averaged scalar flux distribution. Vasques and Yadav recently performed an asymptotic analysis of an adjusted Levermore-Pomraning closure in which the Markovian transition functions are rescaled such that the equations asymptotically limit to the correct atomically-mixed diffusion equation; we refer to this model as LP-VY. In this paper, we demonstrate that the adjusted LP closure proposed by Vasques and Yadav is a special case of the SP closure obtained by assuming that the absorption cross sections in the two materials are equal. We further demonstrate that the Su-Pomraning closure has the correct asymptotic limit for the diffusive physical system and is therefore an appropriate closure for these problems. We also describe how to incorporate these various closures into the Monte Carlo LP and LPLRP particle transport algorithms, and we present numerical results comparing the accuracy of the Monte Carlo LP, LP-VY, LP-SP, LPLRP, and LPLRP-SP algorithms for the set of diffusive benchmark problems. We demonstrated that the SP closure has the correct asymptotic limit for the diffusive physical system under investigation in this paper and that the VY closure is a special case of the SP closure obtained by assuming equal absorption in the two materials. Both of these closures are readily implemented in the Monte Carlo LP and LPLRP algorithms for particle transport in BSM. Through numerical comparisons to a diffusive benchmark suite, we confirmed that 1) the LP and LPLRP algorithms do not limit to the appropriate diffusion solution and 2) the LP-VY, LP-SP, and LPLRP-SP algorithms limit to the appropriate diffusion solution and are of comparable accuracy. The LPLRP algorithm has been shown to be generally more accurate than the LP algorithm for non-diffusive problems. However, the numerical results in this paper indicate that the LPLRP algorithm does not limit to the correct diffusion equation for the asymptotic limit under consideration. The work in this paper demonstrates that the SP algorithm does limit to the correct diffusion equation for the asymptotic limit considered. Future work will investigate the possibility of whether the LPLRP-SP algorithm is accurate for both diffusive and non-diffusive problems.
73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
Validation of deformable image registration algorithms on CT images of ex vivo porcine bladders with fiducial markers
Purpose: The spatial accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) is important in the implementation of image guided adaptive radiotherapy techniques for cancer in the pelvic region. Validation of algorithms is best performed on phantoms with fiducial markers undergoing controlled large deformations. Excised porcine bladders, exhibiting similar filling and voiding behavior as human bladders, provide such an environment. The aim of this study was to determine the spatial accuracy of different DIR algorithms on CT images ofex vivo porcine bladders with radiopaque fiducial markers applied to the outer surface, for a range of bladder volumes, using various accuracy metrics. Methods: Five excised porcine bladders with a grid of 30–40 radiopaque fiducial markers attached to the outer wall were suspended inside a water-filled phantom. The bladder was filled with a controlled amount of water with added contrast medium for a range of filling volumes (100–400 ml in steps of 50 ml) using a luer lock syringe, and CT scans were acquired at each filling volume. DIR was performed for each data set, with the 100 ml bladder as the reference image. Six intensity-based algorithms (optical flow or demons-based) implemented in theMATLAB platform DIRART, a b-spline algorithm implemented in the commercial software package VelocityAI, and a structure-based algorithm (Symmetric Thin Plate Spline Robust Point Matching) were validated, using adequate parameter settings according to values previously published. The resulting deformation vector field from each registration was applied to the contoured bladder structures and to the marker coordinates for spatial error calculation. The quality of the algorithms was assessed by comparing the different error metrics across the different algorithms, and by comparing the effect of deformation magnitude (bladder volume difference) per algorithm, using the Independent Samples Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The authors found good structure accuracy without dependency on bladder volume difference for all but one algorithm, and with the best result for the structure-based algorithm. Spatial accuracy as assessed from marker errors was disappointing for all algorithms, especially for large volume differences, implying that the deformations described by the registration did not represent anatomically correct deformations. The structure-based algorithm performed the best in terms of marker error for the large volume difference (100–400 ml). In general, for the small volume difference (100–150 ml) the algorithms performed relatively similarly. The structure-based algorithm exhibited the best balance in performance between small and large volume differences, and among the intensity-based algorithms, the algorithm implemented in VelocityAI exhibited the best balance. Conclusions: Validation of multiple DIR algorithms on a novel physiological bladder phantom revealed that the structure accuracy was good for most algorithms, but that the spatial accuracy as assessed from markers was low for all algorithms, especially for large deformations. Hence, many of the available algorithms exhibit sufficient accuracy for contour propagation purposes, but possibly not for accurate dose accumulation.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System
Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.
Trevino, Luis↗
A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System
The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.
Trevino, Luis↗
Trellises and Trellis-Based Decoding Algorithms for Linear Block Codes
A code trellis is a graphical representation of a code, block or convolutional, in which every path represents a codeword (or a code sequence for a convolutional code). This representation makes it possible to implement Maximum Likelihood Decoding (MLD) of a code with reduced decoding complexity. The most well known trellis-based MLD algorithm is the Viterbi algorithm. The trellis representation was first introduced and used for convolutional codes [23]. This representation, together with the Viterbi decoding algorithm, has resulted in a wide range of applications of convolutional codes for error control in digital communications over the last two decades. There are two major reasons for this inactive period of research in this area. First, most coding theorists at that time believed that block codes did not have simple trellis structure like convolutional codes and maximum likelihood decoding of linear block codes using the Viterbi algorithm was practically impossible, except for very short block codes. Second, since almost all of the linear block codes are constructed algebraically or based on finite geometries, it was the belief of many coding theorists that algebraic decoding was the only way to decode these codes. These two reasons seriously hindered the development of efficient soft-decision decoding methods for linear block codes and their applications to error control in digital communications. This led to a general belief that block codes are inferior to convolutional codes and hence, that they were not useful. Chapter 2 gives a brief review of linear block codes. The goal is to provide the essential background material for the development of trellis structure and trellis-based decoding algorithms for linear block codes in the later chapters. Chapters 3 through 6 present the fundamental concepts, finite-state machine model, state space formulation, basic structural properties, state labeling, construction procedures, complexity, minimality, and sectionalization of trellises. Chapter 7 discusses trellis decomposition and subtrellises for low-weight codewords. Chapter 8 first presents well known methods for constructing long powerful codes from short component codes or component codes of smaller dimensions, and then provides methods for constructing their trellises which include Shannon and Cartesian product techniques. Chapter 9 deals with convolutional codes, puncturing, zero-tail termination and tail-biting.Chapters 10 through 13 present various trellis-based decoding algorithms, old and new. Chapter 10 first discusses the application of the well known Viterbi decoding algorithm to linear block codes, optimum sectionalization of a code trellis to minimize computation complexity, and design issues for IC (integrated circuit) implementation of a Viterbi decoder. Then it presents a new decoding algorithm for convolutional codes, named Differential Trellis Decoding (DTD) algorithm. Chapter 12 presents a suboptimum reliability-based iterative decoding algorithm with a low-weight trellis search for the most likely codeword. This decoding algorithm provides a good trade-off between error performance and decoding complexity. All the decoding algorithms presented in Chapters 10 through 12 are devised to minimize word error probability. Chapter 13 presents decoding algorithms that minimize bit error probability and provide the corresponding soft (reliability) information at the output of the decoder. Decoding algorithms presented are the MAP (maximum a posteriori probability) decoding algorithm and the Soft-Output Viterbi Algorithm (SOVA) algorithm. Finally, the minimization of bit error probability in trellis-based MLD is discussed.
Lin, Shu↗
SU-E-T-91: Accuracy of Dose Calculation Algorithms for Patients Undergoing Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate and quantify the variation in dose distributions in small field lung cancer radiotherapy using seven different dose calculation algorithms. Methods: The study was performed in 21 lung cancer patients who underwent Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR). Two different methods (i) Same dose coverage to the target volume (named as same dose method) (ii) Same monitor units in all algorithms (named as same monitor units) were used for studying the performance of seven different dose calculation algorithms in XiO and Eclipse treatment planning systems. The seven dose calculation algorithms include Superposition, Fast superposition, Fast Fourier Transform ( FFT) Convolution, Clarkson, Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA), Acurous XB and pencil beam (PB) algorithms. Prior to this, a phantom study was performed to assess the accuracy of these algorithms. Superposition algorithm was used as a reference algorithm in this study. The treatment plans were compared using different dosimetric parameters including conformity, heterogeneity and dose fall off index. In addition to this, the dose to critical structures like lungs, heart, oesophagus and spinal cord were also studied. Statistical analysis was performed using Prism software. Results: The mean±stdev with conformity index for Superposition, Fast superposition, Clarkson and FFT convolution algorithms were 1.29±0.13, 1.31±0.16, 2.2±0.7 and 2.17±0.59 respectively whereas for AAA, pencil beam and Acurous XB were 1.4±0.27, 1.66±0.27 and 1.35±0.24 respectively. Conclusion: Our study showed significant variations among the seven different algorithms. Superposition and AcurosXB algorithms showed similar values for most of the dosimetric parameters. Clarkson, FFT convolution and pencil beam algorithms showed large differences as compared to superposition algorithms. Based on our study, we recommend Superposition and AcurosXB algorithms as the first choice of algorithms in lung cancer radiotherapy involving small fields. However, further investigation by Monte Carlo simulation is required to confirm our results.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
Highlights of TOMS Version 9 Total Ozone Algorithm
The fundamental basis of TOMS total ozone algorithm was developed some 45 years ago by Dave and Mateer. It was designed to estimate total ozone from satellite measurements of the backscattered UV radiances at few discrete wavelengths in the Huggins ozone absorption band (310-340 nm). Over the years, as the need for higher accuracy in measuring total ozone from space has increased, several improvements to the basic algorithms have been made. They include: better correction for the effects of aerosols and clouds, an improved method to account for the variation in shape of ozone profiles with season, latitude, and total ozone, and a multi-wavelength correction for remaining profile shape errors. These improvements have made it possible to retrieve total ozone with just 3 spectral channels of moderate spectral resolution (approx. 1 nm) with accuracy comparable to state-of-the-art spectral fitting algorithms like DOAS that require high spectral resolution measurements at large number of wavelengths. One of the deficiencies of the TOMS algorithm has been that it doesn't provide an error estimate. This is a particular problem in high latitudes when the profile shape errors become significant and vary with latitude, season, total ozone, and instrument viewing geometry. The primary objective of the TOMS V9 algorithm is to account for these effects in estimating the error bars. This is done by a straightforward implementation of the Rodgers optimum estimation method using a priori ozone profiles and their error covariances matrices constructed using Aura MLS and ozonesonde data. The algorithm produces a vertical ozone profile that contains 1-2.5 pieces of information (degrees of freedom of signal) depending upon solar zenith angle (SZA). The profile is integrated to obtain the total column. We provide information that shows the altitude range in which the profile is best determined by the measurements. One can use this information in data assimilation and analysis. A side benefit of this algorithm is that it is considerably simpler than the present algorithm that uses a database of 1512 profiles to retrieve total ozone. These profiles are tedious to construct and modify. Though conceptually similar to the SBUV V8 algorithm that was developed about a decade ago, the SBUV and TOMS V9 algorithms differ in detail. The TOMS algorithm uses 3 wavelengths to retrieve the profile while the SBUV algorithm uses 6-9 wavelengths, so TOMS provides less profile information. However both algorithms have comparable total ozone information and TOMS V9 can be easily adapted to use additional wavelengths from instruments like GOME, OMI and OMPS to provide better profile information at smaller SZAs. The other significant difference between the two algorithms is that while the SBUV algorithm has been optimized for deriving monthly zonal means by making an appropriate choice of the a priori error covariance matrix, the TOMS algorithm has been optimized for tracking short-term variability using month and latitude dependent covariance matrices.
Bhartia, Pawan↗
A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System
The development of the Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large complex systems engineering challenge being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams composed of multiple development disciplines. NASA also has formed an M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle. This team has developed a dedicated Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. The flexibility of VMET enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models. The intent is to validate the algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to flight software test processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test processes. Risk reduction is addressed by working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and detection and responses that can be tested in VMET and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM. The plan for VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.
Trevino, Luis↗
A simple suboptimal least-squares algorithm for attitude determination with multiple sensors
Three-axis attitude determination is equivalent to finding a coordinate transformation matrix which transforms a set of reference vectors fixed in inertial space to a set of measurement vectors fixed in the spacecraft. The attitude determination problem can be expressed as a constrained optimization problem. The constraint is that a coordinate transformation matrix must be proper, real, and orthogonal. A transformation matrix can be thought of as optimal in the least-squares sense if it maps the measurement vectors to the reference vectors with minimal 2-norm errors and meets the above constraint. This constrained optimization problem is known as Wahba's problem. Several algorithms which solve Wahba's problem exactly have been developed and used. These algorithms, while steadily improving, are all rather complicated. Furthermore, they involve such numerically unstable or sensitive operations as matrix determinant, matrix adjoint, and Newton-Raphson iterations. This paper describes an algorithm which minimizes Wahba's loss function, but without the constraint. When the constraint is ignored, the problem can be solved by a straightforward, numerically stable least-squares algorithm such as QR decomposition. Even though the algorithm does not explicitly take the constraint into account, it still yields a nearly orthogonal matrix for most practical cases; orthogonality only becomes corrupted when the sensor measurements are very noisy, on the same order of magnitude as the attitude rotations. The algorithm can be simplified if the attitude rotations are small enough so that the approximation sin(theta) approximately equals theta holds. We then compare the computational requirements for several well-known algorithms. For the general large-angle case, the QR least-squares algorithm is competitive with all other know algorithms and faster than most. If attitude rotations are small, the least-squares algorithm can be modified to run faster, and this modified algorithm is faster than all but a similarly specialized version of the QUEST algorithm. We also introduce a novel measurement averaging technique which reduces the n-measurement case to the two measurement case for our particular application, a star tracker and earth sensor mounted on an earth-pointed geosynchronous communications satellite. Using this technique, many n-measurement problems reduce to less than or equal to 3 measurements; this reduces the amount of required calculation without significant degradation in accuracy. Finally, we present the results of some tests which compare the least-squares algorithm with the QUEST and FOAM algorithms in the two-measurement case. For our example case, all three algorithms performed with similar accuracy.
Brozenec, Thomas F.↗
Recursive Branching Simulated Annealing Algorithm
This innovation is a variation of a simulated-annealing optimization algorithm that uses a recursive-branching structure to parallelize the search of a parameter space for the globally optimal solution to an objective. The algorithm has been demonstrated to be more effective at searching a parameter space than traditional simulated-annealing methods for a particular problem of interest, and it can readily be applied to a wide variety of optimization problems, including those with a parameter space having both discrete-value parameters (combinatorial) and continuous-variable parameters. It can take the place of a conventional simulated- annealing, Monte-Carlo, or random- walk algorithm. In a conventional simulated-annealing (SA) algorithm, a starting configuration is randomly selected within the parameter space. The algorithm randomly selects another configuration from the parameter space and evaluates the objective function for that configuration. If the objective function value is better than the previous value, the new configuration is adopted as the new point of interest in the parameter space. If the objective function value is worse than the previous value, the new configuration may be adopted, with a probability determined by a temperature parameter, used in analogy to annealing in metals. As the optimization continues, the region of the parameter space from which new configurations can be selected shrinks, and in conjunction with lowering the annealing temperature (and thus lowering the probability for adopting configurations in parameter space with worse objective functions), the algorithm can converge on the globally optimal configuration. The Recursive Branching Simulated Annealing (RBSA) algorithm shares some features with the SA algorithm, notably including the basic principles that a starting configuration is randomly selected from within the parameter space, the algorithm tests other configurations with the goal of finding the globally optimal solution, and the region from which new configurations can be selected shrinks as the search continues. The key difference between these algorithms is that in the SA algorithm, a single path, or trajectory, is taken in parameter space, from the starting point to the globally optimal solution, while in the RBSA algorithm, many trajectories are taken; by exploring multiple regions of the parameter space simultaneously, the algorithm has been shown to converge on the globally optimal solution about an order of magnitude faster than when using conventional algorithms. Novel features of the RBSA algorithm include: 1. More efficient searching of the parameter space due to the branching structure, in which multiple random configurations are generated and multiple promising regions of the parameter space are explored; 2. The implementation of a trust region for each parameter in the parameter space, which provides a natural way of enforcing upper- and lower-bound constraints on the parameters; and 3. The optional use of a constrained gradient- search optimization, performed on the continuous variables around each branch s configuration in parameter space to improve search efficiency by allowing for fast fine-tuning of the continuous variables within the trust region at that configuration point.
Bolcar, Matthew↗
A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System
The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.
Trevino, Luis↗
A matrix-algebraic formulation of distributed-memory maximal cardinality matching algorithms in bipartite graphs
We describe parallel algorithms for computing maximal cardinality matching in a bipartite graph on distributed-memory systems. Unlike traditional algorithms that match one vertex at a time, our algorithms process many unmatched vertices simultaneously using a matrix-algebraic formulation of maximal matching. This generic matrix-algebraic framework is used to develop three efficient maximal matching algorithms with minimal changes. The newly developed algorithms have two benefits over existing graph-based algorithms. First, unlike existing parallel algorithms, cardinality of matching obtained by the new algorithms stays constant with increasing processor counts, which is important for predictable and reproducible performance. Second, relying on bulk-synchronous matrix operations, these algorithms expose a higher degree of parallelism on distributed-memory platforms than existing graph-based algorithms. We report high-performance implementations of three maximal matching algorithms using hybrid OpenMP-MPI and evaluate the performance of these algorithm using more than 35 real and randomly generated graphs. On real instances, our algorithms achieve up to 200 × speedup on 2048 cores of a Cray XC30 supercomputer. Even higher speedups are obtained on larger synthetically generated graphs where our algorithms show good scaling on up to 16,384 cores.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗