SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “requirement formalization”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

High Energy Physics Network Requirements Review: Final Report, July 2024–December 2024

The world-class research infrastructure at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science (SC) provides the research community with premier observational, experimental, computational, and network capabilities. Each user facility is designed to provide unique capabilities to advance the core DOE mission in science and technology for its SC program to stimulate rich scientific discoveries and enhance its innovation ecosystem. Research communities gather and flourish around each user facility, bringing together new and enhanced perspectives. The continual reinvention of the practice of science — as users and staff forge novel approaches expressed in research workflows — unlocks new discoveries and propels scientific progress. Within this research ecosystem, the high-performance computing (HPC) and networking user facilities stewarded by the SC’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program play a dynamic cross-cutting role, enabling complex workflows demanding high-performance data, networking, and computing solutions. The ASCR facilities enterprise seeks to understand and meet the needs and requirements across SC and DOE domain science programs and priority efforts, highlighted by the formal requirements review methodology. Between July and December 2024, the Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) and the Office of High Energy Physics (HEP) of the DOE-SC organized an ESnet requirements review of HEP-supported program activities. Preparation for these events included identification of key stakeholders: program and facility management, research groups, and technology providers. Each stakeholder group was asked to prepare formal case study documents about its relationship to the HEP program to build a complete understanding of the current, near-term, and long-term status, expectations, and processes that will support the science going forward.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

NASA NTRS1994

Experience report: Using formal methods for requirements analysis of critical spacecraft software

Formal specification and analysis of requirements continues to gain support as a method for producing more reliable software. However, the introduction of formal methods to a large software project is difficult, due in part to the unfamiliarity of the specification languages and the lack of graphics. This paper reports results of an investigation into the effectiveness of formal methods as an aid to the requirements analysis of critical, system-level fault-protection software on a spacecraft currently under development. Our experience indicates that formal specification and analysis can enhance the accuracy of the requirements and add assurance prior to design development in this domain. The work described here is part of a larger, NASA-funded research project whose purpose is to use formal-methods techniques to improve the quality of software in space applications. The demonstration project described here is part of the effort to evaluate experimentally the effectiveness of supplementing traditional engineering approaches to requirements specification with the more rigorous specification and analysis available with formal methods.

Lutz, Robyn R.↗

NASA NTRS2010

What is the Final Verification of Engineering Requirements?

This slide presentation reviews the process of development through the final verification of engineering requirements. The definition of the requirements is driven by basic needs, and should be reviewed by both the supplier and the customer. All involved need to agree upon a formal requirements including changes to the original requirements document. After the requirements have ben developed, the engineering team begins to design the system. The final design is reviewed by other organizations. The final operational system must satisfy the original requirements, though many verifications should be performed during the process. The verification methods that are used are test, inspection, analysis and demonstration. The plan for verification should be created once the system requirements are documented. The plan should include assurances that every requirement is formally verified, that the methods and the responsible organizations are specified, and that the plan is reviewed by all parties. The options of having the engineering team involved in all phases of the development as opposed to having some other organization continue the process once the design has been complete is discussed.

Poole, Eric↗

NASA NTRS1994

Experience Report: Using Formal Methods for Requirements Analysis of Critical Spacecraft Software

Formal↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Verifying PLC Programs via Monitors: Extending the Integration of FRET and PLCverif

Verification of Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) programs requires reasoning about propositions qualified in terms of time. CERN’s PLCverif, an open-source tool for the analysis of safety-critical PLC systems, uses Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) for the specification of properties. Until now, PLCverif depended on third-party tools that accept LTL specifications to perform verification. However, our experience with industrial PLC programs shows that, to overcome analysis limitations, a wide range of techniques are needed to successfully verify complex properties. In this paper, we extend PLCverif to enable PLC program verification of pure-past LTL (PLTL) safety properties with assertion-based verification tools. To this end, we take an algorithm from the runtime-monitoring domain, apply it to bounded model checking of PLC programs, and implement it in PLCverif. We extend the integration of NASA’s Formal Requirements Elicitation Tool (FRET) into PLCverif to use PLTL properties generated with FRET. In addition, we leverage the program structure induced by the PLC scan-cycle for a state-space reduction. Finally, we expose the algorithm to a real-world case study of critical systems at CERN.

Formal verification↗

NASA NTRS2005

What Sensing Tells Us: Towards a Formal Theory of Testing for Dynamical Systems

Just as actions can have indirect effects on the state of the world, so too can sensing actions have indirect effects on an agent's state of knowledge. In this paper, we investigate "what sensing actions tell us", i.e., what an agent comes to know indirectly from the outcome of a sensing action, given knowledge of its actions and state constraints that hold in the world. To this end, we propose a formalization of the notion of testing within a dialect of the situation calculus that includes knowledge and sensing actions. Realizing this formalization requires addressing the ramification problem for sensing actions. We formalize simple tests as sensing actions. Complex tests are expressed in the logic programming language Golog. We examine what it means to perform a test, and how the outcome of a test affects an agent's state of knowledge. Finally, we propose automated reasoning techniques for test generation and complex-test verification, under certain restrictions. The work presented in this paper is relevant to a number of application domains including diagnostic problem solving, natural language understanding, plan recognition, and active vision.

McIlraith, Sheila↗

NASA NTRS1990

Space Station EVA System Evolution Study

Evaluation of Space Station Freedom support of manned exploration is in progress to identify SSF EVA system evolution requirements and capabilities. The output from these studies will provide data to support the preliminary design process to ensure that Space Station EVA system requirements for future missions (including the Transportation Node) are adequately considered and reflected. The study considers SSF support of future missions and the EVA system baseline to determine adequacy of EVA requirements and capabilities, and to identify additional requirements, capabilities, and necessary technology upgrades. EVA demands levied by formal requirements and indicated by evolution mission scenarios are high for the out-years of Space Station Freedom. An EVA system designed to meet the baseline requirements can easily evolve to meet evolution demands with few exceptions. Results to date indicate that upgrades or modifications to the EVA system may be necessary to meet all forseeable hangar induced EVA environments. Work continues to quantity the EVA capability in this regard. Evolution mission scenarios with EVA in and around unshielded nuclear propulsion engines are inconsistent with anthropomorphic EVA capabilities.

Rouen, Michael N.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Space Station Freedom extravehicular activity systems evolution study

Evaluation of Space Station Freedom (SSF) support of manned exploration is in progress to identify SSF extravehicular activity (EVA) system evolution requirements and capabilities. The output from these studies will provide data to support the preliminary design process to ensure that Space Station EVA system requirements for future missions (including the transportation node) are adequately considered and reflected in the baseline design. The study considers SSF support of future missions and the EVA system baseline to determine adequacy of EVA requirements and capabilities and to identify additional requirements, capabilities, and necessary technology upgrades. The EVA demands levied by formal requirements and indicated by evolutionary mission scenarios are high for the out-years of Space Station Freedom. An EVA system designed to meet the baseline requirements can easily evolve to meet evolution demands with few exceptions. Results to date indicate that upgrades or modifications to the EVA system may be necessary to meet the full range of EVA thermal environments associated with the transportation node. Work continues to quantify the EVA capability in this regard. Evolution mission scenarios with EVA and ground unshielded nuclear propulsion engines are inconsistent with anthropomorphic EVA capabilities.

Rouen, Michael↗

DOE OSTI2023

ESnet Requirements Review Program Through the IRI Lens: A Meta-Analysis of Workflow Patterns Across DOE Office of Science Programs (Final Report)

The Department of Energy (DOE) ensures America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions. The DOE’s Office of Science (SC) delivers groundbreaking scientific discoveries and major scientific tools that transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic, and national security of the United States. The SC’s programs advance DOE mission science across a wide range of disciplines and have developed the research infrastructure needed to remain at the forefront of scientific discovery. The DOE SC’s world-class research infrastructure — exemplified by the 28 SC scientific user facilities — provides the research community with premier observational, experimental, computational, and network capabilities. Each user facility is designed to provide unique capabilities to advance core DOE mission science for its sponsor SC program and to stimulate a rich discovery and innovation ecosystem. Research communities gather and flourish around each user facility, bringing together diverse perspectives. A hallmark of many facilities is the large population of students, postdoctoral researchers, and early-career scientists who contribute as full-fledged users. These facility staff and users collaborate over years to devise new approaches to utilizing the user facility’s core capabilities. The history of the SC user facilities has many examples of wildly inventive researchers challenging operational orthodoxy to pioneer new vistas of discovery; for example, the use of the synchrotron X-ray light sources for study of proteins and other large biological molecules. This continual reinvention of the practice of science — as users and staff forge novel approaches expressed in research workflows — unlocks new discoveries and propels scientific progress. Within this research ecosystem, the high-performance computing (HPC) and networking user facilities stewarded by SC’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program play a dynamic cross-cutting role, enabling complex workflows demanding high performance data, networking, and computing solutions. The DOE SC’s three HPC user facilities and the Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) high-performance research network serve all of the SC’s programs as well as the global research community. Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF), the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), and Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) conceive, build, and provide access to a range of supercomputing, advanced computing, and large-scale data-infrastructure platforms, while ESnet interconnects DOE SC research infrastructure and enables seamless exchange of scientific data. All four facilities operate testbeds to expand the frontiers of computing and networking research. Together, the ASCR facilities enterprise seeks to understand and meet the needs and requirements across SC and DOE domain science programs and priority efforts, highlighted by the formal requirements reviews (RRs) methodology. In recent years, the research communities around the SC user facilities have begun experimenting with and demanding solutions integrated with HPC and data infrastructure. This rise of integrated-science approaches is documented in many community and high-level government reports. At the dawn of the era of exascale science and the acceleration of artificial intelligence (AI) innovation, there is a broad need for integrated computational, data, and networking solutions. In response to these drivers, DOE has developed a vision for an Integrated Research Infrastructure (IRI): To empower researchers to meld DOE’s world-class research tools, infrastructure, and user facilities seamlessly and securely in novel ways to radically accelerate discovery and innovation.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS1997

Experiences Using Lightweight Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling

This paper describes three case studies in the lightweight application of formal methods to requirements modeling for spacecraft fault protection systems. The case studies differ from previously reported applications of formal methods in that formal methods were applied very early in the requirements engineering process, to validate the evolving requirements. The results were fed back into the projects, to improve the informal specifications. For each case study, we describe what methods were applied, how they were applied, how much effort was involved, and what the findings were. In all three cases, formal methods enhanced the existing verification and validation processes, by testing key properties of the evolving requirements, and helping to identify weaknesses. We conclude that the benefits gained from early modeling of unstable requirements more than outweigh the effort needed to maintain multiple representations.

Easterbrook, Steve↗

NASA NTRS1996

Experiences Using Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling

This paper describes three cases studies in the lightweight application of formal methods to requirements modeling for spacecraft fault protection systems. The case studies differ from previously reported applications of formal methods in that formal methods were applied very early in the requirements engineering process, to validate the evolving requirements. The results were fed back into the projects, to improve the informal specifications. For each case study, we describe what methods were applied, how they were applied, how much effort was involved, and what the findings were. In all three cases, the formal modeling provided a cost effective enhancement of the existing verification and validation processes. We conclude that the benefits gained from early modeling of unstable requirements more than outweigh the effort needed to maintain multiple representations.

Easterbrook, Steve↗

NASA NTRS2022

Integrating FRET with Copilot: Automated Translation of Natural Language Requirements to Runtime Monitors

Runtime verification (RV) enables monitoring systems at runtime, to detect property violations early and limit their potential consequences. To provide the level of assurance required for ultra-critical systems, monitor specifications must faithfully reflect the original mission requirements, which are often written in ambiguous natural language. This paper presents an end-to-end framework to capture requirements in structured natural language and generate monitors that capture their semantics faithfully. We leverage NASA’s Formal Requirement Elicitation Tool (FRET), and the RV system Copilot. We extend FRET with mechanisms to capture additional information needed to generate monitors, and introduce OGMA, a new tool to bridge the gap between FRET and Copilot. With this framework, users can write requirements in an intuitive format and obtain real-time C monitors suitable for use in embedded systems. Our tool chain is available as open source.

FRET↗

NASA NTRS2009

Progress of the NASA/USGS Lunar Regolith Simulant Project

Beginning in 2004 personnel at MSFC began serious efforts to develop a new generation of lunar simulants. The first two products were a replication of the previous JSC-1 simulant under a contract to Orbitec and a major workshop in 2005 on future simulant development. Beginning in 2006 the project refocused its efforts and approached simulant development in a new and more comprehensive manner, examining new approaches in simulant development and ways to more accurately compare simulants to actual lunar materials. This led to a multi-year effort with five major tasks running in parallel. The five tasks are Requirements, Lunar Analysis, Process Development, Feed Stocks, and Standards. Major progress has been made in all five areas. A substantial draft of a formal requirements document now exists and has been largely stable since 2007. It does evolve as specific details of the standards and Lunar Analysis efforts proceed. Lunar Analysis has turned out to be vastly more difficult than anticipated. After great effort to mine existing published and gray literature, the team has realized the necessity of making new measurements of the Apollo samples, an effort that is currently in progress. Process development is substantially ahead of expectations in 2006. It is now practical to synthesize glasses of appropriate composition and purity. It is also possible to make agglutinate particles in significant quantities. A series of minerals commonly found on the Moon has been synthesized. Separation of mineral constituents from starting rock material is also proceeding. Customized grinding and mixing processes have been developed and tested are now being documented. Identification and development of appropriate feedstocks has been both easier and more difficult than anticipated. The Stillwater Mining Company, operating in the Stillwater layered mafic intrusive complex of Montana, has been an amazing resource for the project, but finding adequate sources for some of the components remains a difficult problem. For example the ratio of clino- to ortho-pyroxenes in the Stillwater is not an exact match for lunar materials. One of the sources being examined as an alternative pyroxene source is the Bushveld Complex in South Africa. Standards have been a major success for the project. The Figure of Merit algorithms have been created, tested, and are being considered for an ISO standard. Agreement has been reached in the community about how to make many of the critical measurements. There remains much work to do: (1) driving down the cost of simulants remains a major obstacle; (2) documentation and cost data analysis have not kept up with progress; (3) educating users in the complexity of the lunar regolith and the use of simulants remains a major task. In summary the project has made enormous progress and is successfully placing simulant development and use on a rigorous, scientifically defensible, engineering basis.

Rickman, Doug↗

NASA NTRS1996

Experiences Using Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling

This paper describes three case studies in the lightweight application of formal methods to requirements modeling for spacecraft fault protection systems.

spacecraft↗

NASA NTRS2010

Coverage Metrics for Requirements-Based Testing: Evaluation of Effectiveness

In black-box testing, the tester creates a set of tests to exercise a system under test without regard to the internal structure of the system. Generally, no objective metric is used to measure the adequacy of black-box tests. In recent work, we have proposed three requirements coverage metrics, allowing testers to objectively measure the adequacy of a black-box test suite with respect to a set of requirements formalized as Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) properties. In this report, we evaluate the effectiveness of these coverage metrics with respect to fault finding. Specifically, we conduct an empirical study to investigate two questions: (1) do test suites satisfying a requirements coverage metric provide better fault finding than randomly generated test suites of approximately the same size?, and (2) do test suites satisfying a more rigorous requirements coverage metric provide better fault finding than test suites satisfying a less rigorous requirements coverage metric? Our results indicate (1) only one coverage metric proposed -- Unique First Cause (UFC) coverage -- is sufficiently rigorous to ensure test suites satisfying the metric outperform randomly generated test suites of similar size and (2) that test suites satisfying more rigorous coverage metrics provide better fault finding than test suites satisfying less rigorous coverage metrics.

Staats, Matt↗

NASA NTRS2024

Moon to Mars (M2M) Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Process

It is the goal of Moon to Mars (M2M) to establish a single consolidated set of safety requirements and a safety review process for utilization payloads that will cross program vehicle hatches or operate externally on multiple program vehicles during transport or operation that satisfies Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Orion, EVA, and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), Gateway (GW), and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. This document defines the Cross Program Utilization Payload (xPUP) safety review process for mission effectivity of Artemis III and beyond. This review process will help ensure protection of the overall Moon to Mars integrated system from potential hazards created by cross program payloads that either cross a program vehicle hatch or can interface with more than one M2M lunar exploration program vehicle. The process will identify payload hazards and controls that will protect ground personnel, flight crew, the integrated vehicle, ground equipment, or facilities. This process is also applicable to samples that cross hatches between vehicles including for return to Earth. The xPUP safety review process will be led by one of the M2M programs' integration safety panels, chosen on a per-payload basis. After the lead integration safety panel is determined, the common safety process is established, based on pre-determined criteria, which includes ad-hoc members from other stakeholder programs. Stakeholder programs are those that interface with the utilization payload in any way (e.g., operating on a lunar exploration vehicle or crossing program vehicle hatches). The xPUP will execute this safety review process for flight and ground utilization payload hardware design, its ground support equipment, and landing and recovery in accordance with the applicable safety requirements as specified in M2M-30043: Moon to Mars Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Requirements. The xPUP safety process will follow the lead integration safety panel’s safety process requirements. Formal agreements will be communicated with the payload developer using the payload integration processes documented in M2M-30037, Artemis Payload Integration Implementation Plan.

payloads↗

NASA NTRS2021

Compositional Realizability Checking within FRET

A set of requirements for a reactive system is realizable if, for any sequence of inputs that satisfy the assumptions on the environment, the guarantees always hold. Realizability checking is essential to ensure that an implementation can be constructed that satisfies the requirements. We propose a framework that supports users in the non-trivial task of developing realizable requirements. Our framework uses architectural information to automatically de-compose a set of requirements into subsets that can be analyzed separately, and therefore more efficiently. It then integrates existing algorithms in order to detect unrealizability, identify minimal sets of conflicting requirements, and compute counterexamples. The capability to focus on minimal conflict sets is key for localizing and correcting the sources of unrealizability. Our approach supports this process by enabling users to interactively visualize and explore the produced conflict sets and counterexamples. We have implemented our framework in the open-source Formal Requirements Elicitation Tool (FRET), and have used it on a variety of industrial-level case studies, showcasing the strengths of our approach in terms of raw performance, as well as diagnostic potential.

FRET↗

DOE OSTI2020

On decoupling the integrals of cosmological perturbation theory

ABSTRACT Perturbation theory (PT) is often used to model statistical observables capturing the translation and rotation-invariant information in cosmological density fields. PT produces higher order corrections by integration over linear statistics of the density fields weighted by kernels resulting from recursive solution of the fluid equations. These integrals quickly become high dimensional and naively require increasing computational resources the higher the order of the corrections. Here, we show how to decouple the integrands that often produce this issue, enabling PT corrections to be computed as a sum of products of independent 1D integrals. Our approach is related to a commonly used method for calculating multiloop Feynman integrals in quantum field theory, the Gegenbauer Polynomial x-Space Technique. We explicitly reduce the three terms entering the 2-loop power spectrum, formally requiring 9D integrations, to sums over successive 1D radial integrals. These 1D integrals can further be performed as convolutions, rendering the scaling of this method Nglog Ng with Ng the number of grid points used for each fast Fourier transform. This method should be highly enabling for upcoming large-scale structure redshift surveys where model predictions at an enormous number of cosmological parameter combinations will be required by Monte Carlo Markov Chain searches for the best-fitting values.

Slepian, Zachary↗