Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “arguments”

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 199 records · Page 11

Spitzer Microlensing Parallax for OGLE-2016-BLG-1067: A Sub-Jupiter Orbiting an M Dwarf in the Disk

We report the discovery of a sub-Jupiter-mass planet orbiting beyond the snow line of an M dwarf most likely in the Galactic disk as part of the joint Spitzer and ground-based monitoring of planetary microlensing anomalies toward the Galactic bulge. Most of the microlensing parameters are strongly constrained by the light-curve modeling, and in particular there is a Spitzer-based measurement of the microlens parallax, π(E). However, there are no caustic crossings, so the angular Einstein radius has only an upper limit based on the light-curve modeling alone. Additionally, the analysis leads us to identify eight degenerate configurations: the fourfold microlensing parallax degeneracy being doubled by a degeneracy in the caustic structure present at the level of the ground-based solutions. To calculate the physical parameters, and at the same time to break the parallax degeneracy, we make use of a series of arguments: the χ(exp 2) hierarchy, the Rich argument (stating that the small-parallax solution is more likely), and a prior Galactic model. The preferred configuration, favored by a likelihood ratio of at least 4000, is for a host at D(L)={3.73}(-0.67+0.66)kpc with mass M(L)=0.30(-0.12+0.15) M(☉) , orbited by a Saturn-like planet with M(planet) =0.43(-0.17+0.21) M(Jup) at projected separation a(⊥) =1.70(-0.39+0.38) au, about 2.1 times beyond the system snow line. Therefore, it adds to the growing population of sub-Jupiter planets orbiting beyond the snow line of M dwarfs discovered by microlensing. Based on the rules of the real-time protocol for the selection of events to be followed up with Spitzer, this planet will not enter the sample for measuring the Galactic distribution of planets.

S. Calchi Novati↗

A CubeSat-Payload Radiation-Reliability Assurance Case using Goal Structuring Notation

CubeSats have become an attractive platform for universities, industry, and government space missions because they are cheaper and quicker to develop than full-scale satellites. One way CubeSats keep costs low is by using commercial off-the-shelf parts (COTS) instead of space-qualified parts. Space-qualified parts are often costlier, larger, and consume more power than their commercial counterparts precluding their use within the CubeSat form-factor. Given typical power budgets, monetary budgets, and timelines for CubeSat missions, conventional radiation hardness assurance, like the use of space-qualified parts and radiation testing campaigns of COTS parts, is not practical. Instead, a system-level approach to radiation effects mitigation is needed. In this paper an assurance case for a system-level approach to mitigate radiation effects of a CubeSat science experiment is expressed using Goal Structuring Notation (GSN), a graphical argument standard. The case specifically looks at three main mitigation strategies for the radiation environment: total ionizing dose (TID) screening of parts, detection and recovery from single-event latch-ups (SEL) and single-event functional interrupts (SEFI). The graphical assurance case presented makes a qualitative argument for the radiation reliability of the CubeSat experiment using part and system-level mitigation strategies.

COTS↗

AdvoCATE User Guide

This tutorial gives an overview of AdvoCATE - the assurance case automation toolset - which provides a suite of features for safety risk management, including hazard analysis, the linking of hazards to requirement logs, risk modeling using bow tie diagrams, structured arguments, and evidence logs. In this tutorial we show how these related assurance artifacts can be combined with each other in an integrated assurance case.

Safety assurance↗