Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “planning scheduling autonomy”

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

Automated Planning and Scheduling for Orbital Express (151)

The challenging timeline for DARPA's Orbital Express mission demanded a flexible, responsive, and (above all) safe approach to mission planning. Because the mission was a technology demonstration, pertinent planning information was learned during actual mission execution. This information led to amendments to procedures, which led to changes in the mission plan. In general, we used the ASPEN planner scheduler to generate and validate the mission plans. We enhanced ASPEN to enable it to reason about uncertainty. We also developed a model generator that would read the text of a procedure and translate it into an ASPEN model. These technologies had a significant impact on the success of the Orbital Express mission.

autonomy↗

The Summer Robotic Autonomy Course

We offered a first Robotic Autonomy course this summer, located at NASA/Ames' new NASA Research Park, for approximately 30 high school students. In this 7-week course, students worked in ten teams to build then program advanced autonomous robots capable of visual processing and high-speed wireless communication. The course made use of challenge-based curricula, culminating each week with a Wednesday Challenge Day and a Friday Exhibition and Contest Day. Robotic Autonomy provided a comprehensive grounding in elementary robotics, including basic electronics, electronics evaluation, microprocessor programming, real-time control, and robot mechanics and kinematics. Our course then continued the educational process by introducing higher-level perception, action and autonomy topics, including teleoperation, visual servoing, intelligent scheduling and planning and cooperative problem-solving. We were able to deliver such a comprehensive, high-level education in robotic autonomy for two reasons. First, the content resulted from close collaboration between the CMU Robotics Institute and researchers in the Information Sciences and Technology Directorate and various education program/project managers at NASA/Ames. This collaboration produced not only educational content, but will also be focal to the conduct of formative and summative evaluations of the course for further refinement. Second, CMU rapid prototyping skills as well as the PI's low-overhead perception and locomotion research projects enabled design and delivery of affordable robot kits with unprecedented sensory- locomotory capability. Each Trikebot robot was capable of both indoor locomotion and high-speed outdoor motion and was equipped with a high-speed vision system coupled to a low-cost pan/tilt head. As planned, follow the completion of Robotic Autonomy, each student took home an autonomous, competent robot. This robot is the student's to keep, as she explores robotics with an extremely capable tool in the midst of a new community for roboticists. CMU provided undergraduate course credit for this official course, 16-162U, for 13 students, with all other students receiving course credit from National Hispanic University.

Nourbakhsh, Illah R.↗

Robust local search for spacecraft operations using adaptive noise

Randomization is a standard technique for improving the performance of local search algorithms for constraint satisfaction. However, it is well-known that local search algorithms are constraints satisfaction. However, it is well-known that local search algorithms are to the noise values selected. We investigate the use of an adaptive noise mechanism in an iterative repair-based planner/scheduler for spacecraft operations. Preliminary results indicate that adaptive noise makes the use of randomized repair moves safe and robust; that is, using adaptive noise makes it possible to consistently achieve, performance comparable with the best tuned noise setting without the need for manually tuning the noise parameter.

planning↗

Current results from a Rover Science Data Analysis System

In this paper, we provide a brief overview of the OASIS system, and then describe our recent successes in integrating with and using rover hardware. OASIS currently works in a closed loop fashion with onboard control software (e.g., navigation and vision) and has the ability to autonomously perform the following sequence of steps: analyze gray scale images to find rocks, extract the properties of the rocks, identify rocks of interest, retask the rover to take additional imagery of the identified target and then allow the rover to continue on its original mission. We also describe the early 2004 ground test validation of specific OASIS components on selected Mars Exploration Rover (MER) images. These components include the rockfinding algorithm, RockIT, and the rock size feature extraction code. Our team also developed the RockIT GUI, an interface that allows users to easily visualize and modify the rock-finder results. This interface has allowed us to conduct preliminary testing and validation of the rockfinder's performance.

Coupled Layer Architecture for Robotic Autonomy (C↗

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.↗

Promoting Crew Autonomy in a Human Spaceflight Earth Analog Mission through Self-Scheduling

Deep space exploration missions face the challenge of communication transmission latencies between ground stations and astronaut crews due to increasing distance between the Earth and spacecraft in transit. To address this, research at NASA has aimed toward supporting crew autonomy by enabling astronauts to schedule their own timelines with minimal oversight from Mission Control. While self-scheduling has been shown to be feasible, it is yet to be studied as an integral part of autonomous crew operations. The current paper reviews the operationalization of self-scheduling and a number of related objectives during Campaign 6 of HERA, a Human Exploration Research Analog. Research objectives include studying the effects of phasic autonomy over the course of a 45-day mission, evaluating differences in scheduling performance produced by software interface aids, and deploying a novel measure of crew attitudes toward self-scheduling and plan execution.

crew autonomy↗

Promoting Crew Autonomy in a Human Spaceflight Earth Analog Mission through Self-Scheduling

Deep space exploration missions face the challenge of communication transmission latencies between ground stations and astronaut crews due to increasing distance between the Earth and spacecraft in transit. To address this, research at NASA has aimed toward supporting crew autonomy by enabling astronauts to schedule their own timelines with minimal oversight from Mission Control. While self-scheduling has been shown to be feasible, it is yet to be studied as an integral part of autonomous crew operations. The current paper reviews the operationalization of self-scheduling and a number of related objectives during Campaign 6 of HERA, a Human Exploration Research Analog. Research objectives include studying the effects of phasic autonomy over the course of a 45-day mission, evaluating differences in scheduling performance produced by software interface aids, and deploying a novel measure of crew attitudes toward self-scheduling and plan execution.

crew autonomy↗

Towards a Measure of Situation Awareness for Space Mission Schedulers

The success of space flight missions relies on support provided to astronauts through specialist knowledge of ground-based personnel. One of the many essential tasks that ground personnel provide is the scheduling of flight crew daily activities. Future long duration exploration missions will require astronauts to assume planning and scheduling responsibilities in order to facilitate increased autonomy from ground support. Although situation awareness is critical to the scheduling task, a sufficient measure for this domain has not been developed. This paper documents the approach and process by which the authors developed a framework for measuring situation awareness in space mission schedulers and presents the measure applications’ initial results.

human factors in spaceflight↗

Towards a Measure of Situation Awareness for Space Mission Schedulers

The success of space flight missions relies on support provided to astronauts through specialist knowledge of ground-based personnel. One of the many essential tasks that ground personnel provide is the scheduling of flight crew daily activities. Future long duration exploration missions will require astronauts to assume planning and scheduling responsibilities in order to facilitate increased autonomy from ground support. Although situation awareness is critical to the scheduling task, a sufficient measure for this domain has not been developed. This paper documents the approach and process by which the authors developed a framework for measuring situation awareness in space mission schedulers and presents the measure applications’ initial results.

human factors in spaceflight↗

Leverage Points for System Health Management of Autonomous Systems

Systems Health Management (SHM) is one of three basic functionalities that constitute an autonomous capability of a system. The other two functionalities are Planning & Scheduling, and Task Execution. In an autonomous system, variable autonomy is often distinct from variable authority to sense, decide, and act. There are quantifiable Levels of Autonomy that can be achieved by tuning different portions of the Observe-Orient-Decide-Act loop to provide flexibility and control. This approach is tabulated for multiple domains such as spacecraft and aerial vehicles. Examining SHM through a Systems Thinking lens helps us understand its stocks and flows, loops, and delays. Systems thinking, and modeling, is a useful way to understand change and complexity of systems of many types. There are certain archetypes that underlie well-known autonomy architectures. And there often are leverage points - best places to intervene in a system - that can resolve or mitigate some fundamental challenges in the design and deployment of autonomous systems. I identify these levers and present the ones that have been successfully used in NASA missions.

Systems Thinking↗

Crew Autonomy through Self-Scheduling: Guidelines for Crew Scheduling Performance Envelope and Mitigation Strategies

Future long duration exploration missions (LDEMs) bring new challenges to astronaut crews in deep space, one of which is increased communication latencies with ground stations. As a result, crews will have to behave more autonomously by self-scheduling their own operational timelines in an efficient and effective manner. To support crew autonomy, our team has spent the last few years developing Playbook, a mission planning and scheduling tool. Our research focuses on investigating scheduling performance using Playbook to inform the deployment of novel aids that streamline the timeline creation process and proposing relevant standards and guidelines for autonomous crews in LDEMs. Summarizing yearly progress of research analysis and experiment in HERA.

user experience↗

Artificial Intelligence: Powering Human Exploration of the Moon and Mars

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a growing field of computa- tional science techniques designed to mimic functions per- formed by people. Advancements in autonomy will depend on a portfolio of AI technologies. Automated planning and scheduling is a venerable field of study in AI, and is needed for a variety of mission planning functions. Plan execution technology is less well studied, but important for auton- omy and robotics. Specialized forms of automated reason- ing and machine learning are key technologies to enable fault management. Over the past decade, the NASA Au- tonomous Systems and Operations (ASO) project has devel- oped and demonstrated numerous autonomy enabling tech- nologies employing AI techniques. Our work has employed AI in three distinct ways to enable autonomous mission op- erations capabilities. Crew Autonomy gives astronauts tools to assist in the performance of each of these mission oper-ations functions. Vehicle System Management uses AI tech- niques to turn the astronaut's spacecraft into a robot, allow- ing it to operate when astronauts are not present, or to reduce astronaut workload. AI technology also enables Autonomous Robots as crew assistants or proxies when the crew are not present. When these capabilities are used to enable astro- nauts to operate autonomously, they must be integrated with user interfaces, introducing numerous human factors con- siderations; when these capabilities are used to enable vehi- cle system management, they must be integrated with flight software, and run on embedded processors under the control of real-time operating systems.We first describe human spaceflight mission operations capabilities. The remainder of the paper will describe the ASO project, and the development and demonstration per- formed by ASO since 2011. We will describe the AI tech- niques behind each of these demonstrations, which include a variety of symbolic automated reasoning and machine learn- ing based approaches. Finally, we conclude with an assess- ment of future development needs for AI to enable NASA's future Exploration missions.

Mission Operations↗