Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Software”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1992

Statistical modeling of software reliability

This working paper discusses the statistical simulation part of a controlled software development experiment being conducted under the direction of the System Validation Methods Branch, Information Systems Division, NASA Langley Research Center. The experiment uses guidance and control software (GCS) aboard a fictitious planetary landing spacecraft: real-time control software operating on a transient mission. Software execution is simulated to study the statistical aspects of reliability and other failure characteristics of the software during development, testing, and random usage. Quantification of software reliability is a major goal. Various reliability concepts are discussed. Experiments are described for performing simulations and collecting appropriate simulated software performance and failure data. This data is then used to make statistical inferences about the quality of the software development and verification processes as well as inferences about the reliability of software versions and reliability growth under random testing and debugging.

Miller, Douglas R.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Support for Systematic Code Reviews with the SCRUB Tool

SCRUB is a code review tool that supports both large, team-based software development efforts (e.g., for mission software) as well as individual tasks. The tool was developed at JPL to support a new, streamlined code review process that combines human-generated review reports with program-generated review reports from a customizable range of state-of-the-art source code analyzers. The leading commercial tools include Codesonar, Coverity, and Klocwork, each of which can achieve a reasonably low rate of false-positives in the warnings that they generate. The time required to analyze code with these tools can vary greatly. In each case, however, the tools produce results that would be difficult to realize with human code inspections alone. There is little overlap in the results produced by the different analyzers, and each analyzer used generally increases the effectiveness of the overall effort. The SCRUB tool allows all reports to be accessed through a single, uniform interface (see figure) that facilitates brows ing code and reports. Improvements over existing software include significant simplification, and leveraging of a range of commercial, static source code analyzers in a single, uniform framework. The tool runs as a small stand-alone application, avoiding the security problems related to tools based on Web browsers. A developer or reviewer, for instance, must have already obtained access rights to a code base before that code can be browsed and reviewed with the SCRUB tool. The tool cannot open any files or folders to which the user does not already have access. This means that the tool does not need to enforce or administer any additional security policies. The analysis results presented through the SCRUB tool s user interface are always computed off-line, given that, especially for larger projects, this computation can take longer than appropriate for interactive tool use. The recommended code review process that is supported by the SCRUB tool consists of three phases: Code Review, Developer Response, and Closeout Resolution. In the Code Review phase, all tool-based analysis reports are generated, and specific comments from expert code reviewers are entered into the SCRUB tool. In the second phase, Developer Response, the developer is asked to respond to each comment and tool-report that was produced, either agreeing or disagreeing to provide a fix that addresses the issue that was raised. In the third phase, Closeout Resolution, all disagreements are discussed in a meeting of all parties involved, and a resolution is made for all disagreements. The first two phases generally take one week each, and the third phase is concluded in a single closeout meeting.

Holzmann, Gerald J.↗
NASA NTRS1997

NASA software independent verification and validation (IV and V): An upfront approach to mission success

Software independent verification and validation (IV and V) implementation methods, specific approaches and accomplishments in the application of IV and V to NASA programs are discussed. Because software is mission critical, software assurance is a critical aspect of NASA's safety and mission assurance program. An overview of NASA's software IV and V facility is given.

Gregory, Frederick D.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Software Health Management: A Short Review of Challenges and Existing Techniques

Modern spacecraft (as well as most other complex mechanisms like aircraft, automobiles, and chemical plants) rely more and more on software, to a point where software failures have caused severe accidents and loss of missions. Software failures during a manned mission can cause loss of life, so there are severe requirements to make the software as safe and reliable as possible. Typically, verification and validation (V&V) has the task of making sure that all software errors are found before the software is deployed and that it always conforms to the requirements. Experience, however, shows that this gold standard of error-free software cannot be reached in practice. Even if the software alone is free of glitches, its interoperation with the hardware (e.g., with sensors or actuators) can cause problems. Unexpected operational conditions or changes in the environment may ultimately cause a software system to fail. Is there a way to surmount this problem? In most modern aircraft and many automobiles, hardware such as central electrical, mechanical, and hydraulic components are monitored by IVHM (Integrated Vehicle Health Management) systems. These systems can recognize, isolate, and identify faults and failures, both those that already occurred as well as imminent ones. With the help of diagnostics and prognostics, appropriate mitigation strategies can be selected (replacement or repair, switch to redundant systems, etc.). In this short paper, we discuss some challenges and promising techniques for software health management (SWHM). In particular, we identify unique challenges for preventing software failure in systems which involve both software and hardware components. We then present our classifications of techniques related to SWHM. These classifications are performed based on dimensions of interest to both developers and users of the techniques, and hopefully provide a map for dealing with software faults and failures.

Pipatsrisawat, Knot↗
NASA NTRS2019

Planetary Rover Simulation for Lunar Exploration Missions

When planning planetary rover missions it is useful to develop intuition and skills driving in, quite literally, alien environments before incurring the cost of reaching said locales. Simulators make it possible to operate in environments that have the physical characteristics of target locations without the expense and overhead of extensive physical tests. To that end, NASA Ames and Open Robotics collaborated on a Lunar rover driving simulator based on the open source Gazebo simulation platform and leveraging ROS (Robotic Operating System) components. The simulator was integrated with research and mission software for rover driving, system monitoring, and science instrument simulation to constitute an end-to-end Lunar mission simulation capability. Although we expect our simulator to be applicable to arbitrary Lunar regions, we designed to a reference mission of prospecting in polar regions. The harsh lighting and low illumination angles at the Lunar poles combine with the unique reflectance properties of Lunar regolith to present a challenging visual environment for both human and computer perception. Our simulator placed an emphasis on high fidelity visual simulation in order to produce synthetic imagery suitable for evaluating human rover drivers with navigation tasks, as well as providing test data for computer vision software development.In this paper, we describe the software used to construct the simulated Lunar environment and the components of the driving simulation. Our synthetic terrain generation software artificially increases the resolution of Lunar digital elevation maps by fractal synthesis and inserts craters and rocks based on Lunar size-frequency distribution models. We describe the necessary enhancements to import large scale, high resolution terrains into Gazebo, as well as our approach to modeling the visual environment of the Lunar surface. An overview of the mission software system is provided, along with how ROS was used to emulate flight software components that had not been developed yet. Finally, we discuss the effect of using the high-fidelity synthetic Lunar images for visual odometry. We also characterize the wheel slip model, and find some inconsistencies in the produced wheel slip behaviour.

Allan, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA Tech Briefs, October 2008

Topics covered include: Control Architecture for Robotic Agent Command and Sensing; Algorithm for Wavefront Sensing Using an Extended Scene; CO2 Sensors Based on Nanocrystalline SnO2 Doped with CuO; Improved Airborne System for Sensing Wildfires; VHF Wide-Band, Dual-Polarization Microstrip-Patch Antenna; Onboard Data Processor for Change-Detection Radar Imaging; Using LDPC Code Constraints to Aid Recovery of Symbol Timing; System for Measuring Flexing of a Large Spaceborne Structure; Integrated Formation Optical Communication and Estimation System; Making Superconducting Welds between Superconducting Wires; Method for Thermal Spraying of Coatings Using Resonant-Pulsed Combustion; Coating Reduces Ice Adhesion; Hybrid Multifoil Aerogel Thermal Insulation; SHINE Virtual Machine Model for In-flight Updates of Critical Mission Software; Mars Image Collection Mosaic Builder; Providing Internet Access to High-Resolution Mars Images; Providing Internet Access to High-Resolution Lunar Images; Expressions Module for the Satellite Orbit Analysis Program Virtual Satellite; Small-Body Extensions for the Satellite Orbit Analysis Program (SOAP); Scripting Module for the Satellite Orbit Analysis Program (SOAP); XML-Based SHINE Knowledge Base Interchange Language; Core Technical Capability Laboratory Management System; MRO SOW Daily Script; Tool for Inspecting Alignment of Twinaxial Connectors; An ATP System for Deep-Space Optical Communication; Polar Traverse Rover Instrument; Expert System Control of Plant Growth in an Enclosed Space; Detecting Phycocyanin-Pigmented Microbes in Reflected Light; DMAC and NMP as Electrolyte Additives for Li-Ion Cells; Mass Spectrometer Containing Multiple Fixed Collectors; Waveguide Harmonic Generator for the SIM; Whispering Gallery Mode Resonator with Orthogonally Reconfigurable Filter Function; Stable Calibration of Raman Lidar Water-Vapor Measurements; Bimaterial Thermal Compensators for WGM Resonators; Root Source Analysis/ValuStream[Trade Mark] - A Methodology for Identifying and Managing Risks; Ensemble: an Architecture for Mission-Operations Software; Object Recognition Using Feature-and Color-Based Methods; On-Orbit Multi-Field Wavefront Control with a Kalman Filter; and The Interplanetary Overlay Networking Protocol Accelerator.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1980

Mission planning and analysis division development plan for STS-2 through STS-4

The baseline products, schedules, and resource requirements for the Mission Planning and Analysis Division's support of Space Transportation System flights 2, 3, and 4 are presented. Major functions addressed are: orbiter software, Mission Control Center software, flight design, flight operations support, simulation tools, and postflight analysis.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

What Machines Need to Learn to Support Human Problem-Solving

In the development of intelligent systems that interact with humans, there is often confusion between how the system functions with respect to the humans it interacts with and how it interfaces with those humans. The former is a much deeper challenge than the latter it requires a system-level understanding of evolving human roles as well as an understanding of what humans need to know (and when) in order to perform their tasks. This talk will focus on some of the challenges in getting this right as well as on the type of research and development that results in successful human-autonomy teaming. Brief Bio: Dr. Alonso Vera is Chief of the Human Systems Integration Division at NASA Ames Research Center. His expertise is in human-computer interaction, information systems, artificial intelligence, and computational human performance modeling. He has led the design, development and deployment of mission software systems across NASA robotic and human space flight missions, including Mars Exploration Rovers, Phoenix Mars Lander, ISS, Constellation, and Exploration Systems. Dr. Vera received a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honors from McGill University in 1985 and a Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1991. He went on to a Post-Doctoral Fellowship in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University from 1990-93.

intelligent systems↗
NASA NTRS2003

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗
NASA NTRS2003

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗
NASA NTRS1989

NASA-evolving to Ada: Five-year plan. A plan for implementing recommendations made by the Ada and software management assessment working group

At their March 1988 meeting, members of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Information Resources Management (IRM) Council expressed concern that NASA may not have the infrastructure necessary to support the use of Ada for major NASA software projects. Members also observed that the agency has no coordinated strategy for applying its experiences with Ada to subsequent projects (Hinners, 27 June 1988). To deal with these problems, the IRM Council chair appointed an intercenter Ada and Software Management Assessment Working Group (ASMAWG). They prepared a report (McGarry et al., March 1989) entitled, 'Ada and Software Management in NASA: Findings and Recommendations'. That report presented a series of recommendations intended to enable NASA to develop better software at lower cost through the use of Ada and other state-of-the-art software engineering technologies. The purpose here is to describe the steps (called objectives) by which this goal may be achieved, to identify the NASA officials or organizations responsible for carrying out the steps, and to define a schedule for doing so. This document sets forth four goals: adopt agency-wide software standards and policies; use Ada as the programming language for all mission software; establish an infrastructure to support software engineering, including the use of Ada, and to leverage the agency's software experience; and build the agency's knowledge base in Ada and software engineering. A schedule for achieving the objectives and goals is given.

Source record↗