Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Autonomy Challenges”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Towards Verification and Validation for Increased Autonomy

This presentation goes over the work we have performed over the last few years on verification and validation of the next generation onboard collision avoidance system, ACAS X, for commercial aircraft. It describes our work on probabilistic verification and synthesis of the model that ACAS X is based on, and goes on to the validation of that model with respect to actual simulation and flight data. The presentation then moves on to identify the characteristics of ACAS X that are related to autonomy and to discuss the challenges that autonomy pauses on VV. All work presented has already been published.

Giannakopoulou, Dimitra↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Challenges of Human-Autonomy Teaming

Machine intelligence is improving rapidly based on advances in big data analytics, deep learning algorithms, networked operations, and continuing exponential growth in computing power (Moores Law). This growth in the power and applicability of increasingly intelligent systems will change the roles humans, shifting them to tasks where adaptive problem solving, reasoning and decision-making is required. This talk will address the challenges involved in engineering autonomous systems that function effectively with humans in aeronautics domains.

Human-Autonomy teaming↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Challenges of Human-Autonomy Teaming

Machine intelligence is improving rapidly based on advances in big data analytics, deep learning algorithms, networked operations, and continuing exponential growth in computing power (Moores Law). This growth in the power and applicability of increasingly intelligent systems will change the roles humans, shifting them to tasks where adaptive problem solving, reasoning and decision-making is required. This talk will address the challenges involved in engineering autonomous systems that function effectively with humans in aeronautics domains.

artificial intelligence↗
NASA NTRS2022

Formal Methods for Trusted Space Autonomy, Boon or Bane?

Trusted Space Autonomy is challenging in that space systems are complex artifacts deployed in a high stakes environment with complicated operational settings. Thus far these challenges have been met using the full arsenal of tools: formal methods, informal methods, testing, runtime techniques, and operations processes. Using examples from previous deployments of autonomy to the Remote Agent on DS-1, Autonomous Sciencecraft on EO-1, WATCH on MER, IPEX, AEGIS on MER, MSL, and M2020, and the M2020 Onboard planner, we discuss how each of these approaches have been used to enable successful deployment of autonomy. We next focus on relatively limited use of formal methods (both prior to deployment and runtime methods). From the needs perspective, formal methods represent the best chance for reliable autonomy as testing, informal methods, and operations accommodations do not scale well with increasing complexity of the autonomous system. However from the practice perspective, formal methods have been limited in their application due to difficulty in eliciting formal specifications and challenges in representing complex constraints such as metric time and resources. We discuss some of these challenges as well as the opportunity to extend formal and informal methods into runtime validation systems.

Chien, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2003

Experimental Evaluation of Verification and Validation Tools on Martian Rover Software

To achieve its science objectives in deep space exploration, NASA has a need for science platform vehicles to autonomously make control decisions in a time frame that excludes intervention from Earth-based controllers. Round-trip light-time is one significant factor motivating autonomy capability, another factor is the need to reduce ground support operations cost. An unsolved problem potentially impeding the adoption of autonomy capability is the verification and validation of such software systems, which exhibit far more behaviors (and hence distinct execution paths in the software) than is typical in current deepspace platforms. Hence the need for a study to benchmark advanced Verification and Validation (V&V) tools on representative autonomy software. The objective of the study was to access the maturity of different technologies, to provide data indicative of potential synergies between them, and to identify gaps in the technologies with respect to the challenge of autonomy V&V. The study consisted of two parts: first, a set of relatively independent case studies of different tools on the same autonomy code, second a carefully controlled experiment with human participants on a subset of these technologies. This paper describes the second part of the study. Overall, nearly four hundred hours of data on human use of three different advanced V&V tools were accumulated, with a control group that used conventional testing methods. The experiment simulated four independent V&V teams debugging three successive versions of an executive controller for a Martian Rover. Defects were carefully seeded into the three versions based on a profile of defects from CVS logs that occurred in the actual development of the executive controller. The rest of the document is structured a s follows. In section 2 and 3, we respectively describe the tools used in the study and the rover software that was analyzed. In section 4 the methodology for the experiment is described; this includes the code preparation, seeding of defects, participant training and experimental setup. Next we give a qualitative overview of how the experiment went from the point of view of each technology; model checking (section 5), static analysis (section 6), runtime analysis (section 7) and testing (section 8). The find section gives some preliminary quantitative results on how the tools compared.

Brat, Guillaume↗
NASA NTRS2018

Aeronautics Autonomy Testbed Capability (AATC) Team Developed Concepts

In 2015, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) formed a multi-center, interdisciplinary team of engineers from three different aeronautics research centers who were tasked with improving NASA autonomy research capabilities. This group was subsequently named the Aeronautics Autonomy Testbed Capability (AATC) team. To aid in confronting the autonomy research directive, NASA contracted IDEO, a design firm, to provide consultants and guides to educate NASA engineers through the practice of design thinking, which is an unconventional method for aerospace design processes. The team then began learning about autonomy research challenges by conducting interviews with a diverse group of researchers and pilots, military personnel and civilians, experts and amateurs. Part of this design thinking process involved developing ideas for products or programs known as concepts that could enable real world fulfillment of the most important latent needs identified through analysis of the interviews. The concepts are intended to be sacrificial, intermediate steps in the design thinking process and are presented in this report to record the efforts of the AATC group. Descriptions are provided in present tense to allow for further ideation and imagining the concept as reality as was attempted during the teams discussions and interviews. This does not indicate that the concepts are actually in practice within NASA though there may be similar existing programs independent of AATC. These concepts were primarily created at two distinct stages during the design thinking process. After the initial interviews, there was a workshop for concept development and the resulting ideas are shown in this work as from the First Round. As part of succeeding interviews, the team members presented the First Round concepts to refine the understanding of existing research needs. This knowledge was then used to generate an additional set of concepts denoted as the Second Round. Some concepts were created by a single person in a few minutes while others were refined by the entire team over several weeks. Thus, certain ideas are more detailed than others but those from the second round are not necessarily more comprehensive than the first round concepts. Primarily, as reported here in the Second Round section, the designs serve to encompass more of the high level end user research needs which were not necessarily known to the team during the prior workshop. In the figures provided throughout this report, illustrations are often provided to represent a concept. Nearly all of the images are informal sketches or renderings and this casualness should, hopefully, not be held to negate the potential insights available within the concepts.

Smith, Phillip J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analyzing Natural Language Context in Human-Machine Teaming using Supervised Machine Learning

Building a foundation for trustworthiness and trust verification in multi-asset teaming is the research challenge of Autonomy Teaming and TRAjectories for Complex Trusted Operational Reliability (ATTRACTOR). The Design Reference Mission (DRM) for ATTRACTOR is a search and rescue mission objective governed by a multi-member team consisting of human and machine operators. A crucial component to the effort is the communication between humans and autonomous agents throughout both planning and execution stages of the mission. Intuitive communication methods and modalities are posited as critical enablers for certifying trust and trustworthiness. This paper reports on the data collection and analysis conducted in support of the Human Informed Natural-language GANs Evaluation (HINGE)project to attain explainable and trusted communication between human-machine assets. Two identically curated image description datasets were acquired for HINGE, both consisting of two unique input modalities (typed vs. verbal) and retrieved in two distinct contexts (general vs. specific). The gathered datasets were assessed and compared using Parts-of-Speech (POS)features, sentence similarity metrics, and linguistic analysis. Then, the datasets were modeled and tested separately and in combination with one another using machine learning algorithms. The comparison and testing results reveal a superior dataset, by which a preferred context and input is understood, for generating image representations of missing persons using a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN).

Bryan A Barrows↗
NASA NTRS2001

Reconfigurable robots for all terrain exploration

While significant recent progress has been made in development of mobile robots for planetary suface exploration,there remain major challenges. These include increased autonomy of operation, traverse of challenging terrain, and fault-tolerance under long, unattended periods of use.

mobile robots multi-robot cooperation robotic arch↗
NASA NTRS2001

Challenges and Lessons Learned in the Application of Autonomy to Space Operations

NASA's Space Operations Management Office (SOMO) is working toward a goal of providing an integrated infrastructure of mission and data services for space missions undertaken by NASA enterprises. A significant portion of this effort is focused on reducing the cost of these services. We are interested in the potential of autonomy to reduce operations costs. SOMO services support space missions, but are not part of the mission objectives; therefore the level of acceptable risk is very low. In fact, SOMO could be effective ly prevented from applying autonomy if customers merely perceive it as adding risk to their mission(s). We are interested in this workshop from the standpoint of understanding what can be done to realize the potential cost savings due to autonomy while maintaining acceptable risk and serving the needs of our customers. We would like to present our lessons learned so far in adopting autonomy and automation, which we think will contribute to clarifying the challenges facing the use of such technology. SOMO provides services to a diverse and ambitious set of mission customers. Many of these missions are groundbreaking missions for which communications, data, and other operations requirements sometimes cannot be clearly articulated early in the program. This motivates a need for systems that are robust in the face of unanticipated situations so that customer missions are not unreasonably constrained or impacted by "shortcomings" in SOMO services. One of SOMO's primary goals is to realize a paradigm in which SOMO acts as a service provider to organizations that fly space missions for NASA, other government agencies, and even the commercial sector. These organizations purchase SOMO services "by the pound" as customers. We have to provide systems that are not experiments themselves, but rather stable bases from which to do bold experiments. To this end, SOMO also seeks to work closely with industry to see that robust autonomy technology gets infused into products and services for the space industry and beyond. The potential for application of these technologies spans space-based communications networks (e.g. TDRSS) and ground-based assets including communication and tracking antenna systems, data networks, and control centers. There are several problems that are candidates for the application of autonomy, if it can be made reliable enough, including: antenna control, antenna scheduling, communication link scheduling and operation, navigation, attitude determination, fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration (for spacecraft or ground assets), and mission-level planning and scheduling. Some attempts have been made to apply autonomy and automation in these areas in the past with varying degrees of success. We will present relevant case histories and the lessons inferred from them. Combining this past experience with anticipated future needs, we can clarify the challenges that must be met in order to realize the benefits of autonomy.

Forrest, David J.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Autonomy for Constellation

The newer types of space systems, which are planned for the future, are placing challenging demands for newer autonomy concepts and techniques. Motivating these challenges are resource constraints. Even though onboard computing power will surely increase in the coming years, the resource constraints associated with space-based processes will continue to be a major factor that needs to be considered when dealing with, for example, agent-based spacecraft autonomy. To realize "economical intelligence", i.e., constrained computational intelligence that can reside within a process under severe resource constraints (time, power, space, etc.), is a major goal for such space systems as the Nanosat constellations. To begin to address the new challenges, we are developing approaches to constellation autonomy with constraints in mind. Within the Agent Concepts Testbed (ACT) at the Goddard Space Flight Center we are currently developing a Nanosat-related prototype for the first of the two-step program.

Truszkowski, Walt↗
NASA NTRS2001

Challenges and lessons learned in the application of autonomy to space operations

NASA's Space Operations Management Office (SOMO) is working toward a goal of providing an integrated infrastructure of mission and data services for space missions undertaken by NASA enterprises. A significant portion of this effort is focused on reducing the cost of these services. We are interested in the potential of autonomy to reduce operations costs. Some attempts have already been made to apply autonomy and automation in these areas in the past with varying degrees of success. We present brief case histories and the lessons inferred from them. Combining this past experience with anticipated future needs, we attempt to clarify the challenges that must be met in order to realize the benefits of autonomy.

challenges↗
NASA NTRS2016

UAV Research at NASA Langley: Towards Safe, Reliable, and Autonomous Operations

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) are fundamental components in several aspects of research at NASA Langley, such as flight dynamics, mission-driven airframe design, airspace integration demonstrations, atmospheric science projects, and more. In particular, NASA Langley Research Center (Langley) is using UAVs to develop and demonstrate innovative capabilities that meet the autonomy and robotics challenges that are anticipated in science, space exploration, and aeronautics. These capabilities will enable new NASA missions such as asteroid rendezvous and retrieval (ARRM), Mars exploration, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), pollution measurements in historically inaccessible areas, and the integration of UAVs into our everyday lives all missions of increasing complexity, distance, pace, and/or accessibility. Building on decades of NASA experience and success in the design, fabrication, and integration of robust and reliable automated systems for space and aeronautics, Langley Autonomy Incubator seeks to bridge the gap between automation and autonomy by enabling safe autonomous operations via onboard sensing and perception systems in both data-rich and data-deprived environments. The Autonomy Incubator is focused on the challenge of mobility and manipulation in dynamic and unstructured environments by integrating technologies such as computer vision, visual odometry, real-time mapping, path planning, object detection and avoidance, object classification, adaptive control, sensor fusion, machine learning, and natural human-machine teaming. These technologies are implemented in an architectural framework developed in-house for easy integration and interoperability of cutting-edge hardware and software.

Davila, Carlos G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Risk-Reduction Autonomy Implementation to Enable NASA Artemis Missions

To achieve NASA’s Artemis program mission objectives a high level of autonomy and ubiquitous autonomy throughout the systems that are being developed will be necessary. The autonomous systems of Artemis will require a distributed autonomy capability, with autonomous systems organized functionally in a hierarchical architecture, where systems at higher levels of the hierarchy have authority over systems at lower levels. The challenge of developing autonomy technologies and concepts of operations for Artemis has been undertaken by the NASA Gateway Working Group. This group has developed requirements, architectures, concepts of operations, and interface control documents, in the context of a hierarchical distributed architecture that includes the following: a Vehicle System Manager (VSM) that autonomously manages the entire Gateway; Module System Managers (MSMs) that autonomously manage each module; and System Managers (SMs) that autonomously manage systems within a module(i.e. ECLSS).A substantially high level of autonomy needs to be achieved by each element of the hierarchy (VSM, MSM, SM)to meet requirements for uncrewed operations; this includes conditions that will have minimal and/or delayed ground intervention (i.e. requirements for sustainability for months of operation without crew or ground support). To advance an implementation of this autonomy design (Gateway Autonomy Design –GAD), a collaboration was established between the Autonomous Systems Laboratory (ASL) at NASA Stennis Space Center and Lockheed Martin. The objectives of this partnership were the following: (1)to implement autonomy at the VSM, MSM, and SM levels;(2) to implement communications among a VSM, 2 MSMs, ORION (a visiting vehicle somewhat equivalent to a module) and 1 SM (a power system), and (3) test autonomous operations with representative use cases. A SM backed by a high-fidelity simulation was created to facilitate demonstrations of use cases that originated in a system of a module. Communication between the VSM and MSMs was implemented according to Concepts of Operations and Interface Control Documents (ICDs). Demonstrations were conducted to address nominal and off-nominal operations and multi-module interactions with VSM. Additionally, user interfaces were created to provide awareness about ongoing processes and results while enhancing the demonstration. Demonstrations included the following use cases: (1)Orion as visiting vehicle registers with VSM;(2) VSM reschedules a module’s timelines when another module’s MSM task fails; and (3) a module’s Power System Manager (PSM) standalone demonstration that included component failure diagnostics, tracing component failure to effected components, which in turn, reports failure information up to the VSM for acknowledgement and display. This paper will describe the detailed technology and autonomous systems developed, and the integrated multi-module demonstrations conducted. Also, challenges that must be met to fully implement the GAD defined by Gateway will be addressed.

Autonomous Systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Risk-Reduction Autonomy Implementation to Enable NASA Artemis Missions

To achieve NASA’s Artemis program mission objectives a high level of autonomy that is ubiquitous throughout the systems that are being developed will be necessary. The autonomous systems of Artemis will require a distributed autonomy capability, with autonomous systems organized functionally in a hierarchical architecture, where systems at higher levels of the hierarchy have authority over systems at lower levels. The challenge of developing autonomy technologies and Concepts of Operations (ConOps) for Artemis has been undertaken by the NASA Gateway Working Group. This group has developed requirements, architectures, ConOps, and interface control documents (ICDs), in the context of a hierarchical distributed architecture that includes the following: a Vehicle System Manager (VSM) that autonomously manages the entire Gateway; Module System Managers (MSMs) that autonomously manage each module; and System Managers (SMs) that autonomously manage systems within a module (i.e. ECLSS). A substantially high level of autonomy needs to be achieved by each element of the hierarchy (VSM, MSM, SM) to meet requirements for uncrewed operations; this includes conditions that will have minimal and/or delayed ground intervention (i.e. requirements for sustainability for months of operation without crew or ground support). To advance an implementation of this autonomy design (Gateway Autonomy Design – GAD), a collaboration was established between the Autonomous Systems Laboratory (ASL) at NASA Stennis Space Center and Lockheed Martin. The objectives of this partnership were the following: (1) to implement autonomy at the VSM, MSM, and SM levels; (2) to implement communications among a VSM, 2 MSMs, ORION (a visiting vehicle somewhat equivalent to a module) and 1 SM (a power system), and (3) test autonomous operations with representative use cases. A SM backed by a high-fidelity simulation was created to facilitate demonstrations of use cases that originated in a system of a module. Communication between the VSM and MSMs was implemented according to Concepts of Operations and Interface Control Documents (ICDs). Demonstrations were conducted to address nominal and off-nominal operations and multi-module interactions with the VSM. Additionally, user interfaces were created to provide awareness about ongoing processes and results while enhancing the demonstration. Demonstrations included the following use cases: (1) Orion as visiting vehicle registers with VSM; (2) VSM reschedules a module’s timelines when another module’s MSM task fails; and (3) a module’s Power System Manager (PSM) demonstration that included component failure diagnostics, tracing component failure to effected components, which in turn, reports failure information up to the VSM for acknowledgement and display. This paper will describe the detailed technology and autonomous systems developed, and the integrated multi-module demonstrations conducted. Also, challenges that must be met to fully implement the GAD defined by Gateway will be addressed.

Fernando Figueroa↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mitigating Microbial Contamination Risks in CO 2 Removal Systems for Long-Duration Space Missions

Crewed missions to Mars and beyond pose new challenges for the crew and the technological solutions they depend upon. Crucial considerations in designing the next generation of Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) include enhanced reliability and autonomy, given the challenges of resupply and resource recovery in remote missions. One significant challenge faced in various sectors of the International Space Station and ECLSS is the phenomena of microbial growth, particularly biofilm formation. As such, microbial growth is a critical consideration in the design phase of new ECLSS systems. Two novel CO2 removal systems—Liquid-Amines CO2 Removal (LACR) and Cold-Surface CO2 Deposition (CDep)—are currently under development at the NASA Ames Research Center to meet the needs of extended space travel. In this presentation, the authors aim to make a risk assessment of microbial growth in LACR and CDep through: 1) a comprehensive literature review to identify LACR and CDep components most vulnerable to microbial contamination and 2) wet lab testing commencing with a subscale test of the most susceptible component of CDep. The literature review revealed that the hollow-fiber Liqui-Cel membrane employed in CDep exhibits the highest susceptibility to microbial growth. Our wet lab tests corroborated these findings, as airborne microbes introduced into the membrane led to considerable biomass accumulation. These results indicate a significant risk of microbial invasion into the membranes. To prevent microbial growth in CDep or other CO2 removal systems, proper ECLSS arrangement is essential—a CO2 removal system should remain behind the charcoal-HEPA filters, condensing heat exchanger, and Trace Contaminant Control System. In summary, anticipating potential microbial interactions within ECLSS for remote crewed missions is vital to mission success. It should, therefore, be included as one of the many factors when designing future ECLSS systems to perform reliably and consistently to support astronaut life.

A. Nicolas Whitlock↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗