Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Autonomous Thinking Systems”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing Artificial Thinking Autonomy with Model-Based System Engineering

Complex autonomous systems capable of successfully operating independently under ‘known unknowns’ and harsh conditions require paradigm innovation in modern development strategies. In the field of autonomy, developing a system-of-systems which can ostensibly think for itself in the face of ‘unknown unknowns’ is still a field of ongoing research. Maturing the systems architecting and modeling methodologies for developing henceforth named Thinking Autonomous Systems, which are verified with digital mission simulation, can potentially usher in the next generation of artificial intelligence for space exploration. The concept presented in this paper incorporates multiple Model-Based Systems Engineering and simulation methodologies combined as a new paradigm to design a novel, biomimetic thinking autonomy strategy. Anachronistic concepts from classical Kantian philosophy will be leveraged to inspire architectural designs that could be used for complex distributed systems in deep space. To accomplish this, digital transformation of a document-based implementation plan for Thinking Autonomous Systems, generated by experienced NASA software engineers, is implemented for NASA’s Platform for Autonomous Systems by creating descriptive and executable software models in SysML to prototype real-time operating capabilities. This conceptual implementation has been developed by incorporating model-based digital simulations to theorize how a cyberphysical thinking system would achieve specific strategies without crew reliance, while simultaneously being resilient to all operating conditions and remaining functional when devoid of ground communication. Additionally, ensuring that an autonomous system framework is an ethical Artificial Intelligence requires careful consideration of system behavior and accountability, human factors for teaming with a thinking autonomous system, and comparison to other modern approaches used for implementing true autonomy. This paper presents the first steps in formalizing the metacognition required for instantiating a truly Thinking Autonomous System; the approach described symphonizes autonomy characteristics from classical philosophical into a unified software architecture describing human thought. In the future, the foundational models described in this paper can be further leveraged to help advance research into thinking autonomy requirements for future deep space missions as well as for current near-term applications, i.e., living aboard crewed spacecraft like a NASA Gateway cislunar habitat.

Artificial Thought↗
NASA NTRS2023

Artificial Thought is Required for Sustained Autonomy

Current literature primarily addresses what is referred to as “Systems Thinking.” Dr. Marie Morganelli from Southern New Hampshire University states that “Systems thinking is a holistic way to investigate factors and interactions that could contribute to a possible outcome [1]. A mindset more than a prescribed practice, systems thinking provides an understanding of how individuals can work together in different types of teams and through that understanding, create the best possible processes to accomplish just about any-thing.” So, a “Thinking System” is a system that is capable of “systems thinking,” as it should be able to “ …create [utilize] the best possible processes, and possess the [intelligence] to accomplish just about anything.” To achieve this capability, hu-man-like thinking is required. A truly autonomous system must be one that is capable of human-like thinking. Sustained autonomy requires “Thinking Autonomy” (TA) that is enabled by a “Thinking System.”

Autonomous systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Thinking System and Thinking Autonomy

There are many definitions of what a “Thinking System” (TS) is. The literature primarily addresses what is called “Systems Thinking.” Dr. Marie Morganelli from Southern New Hampshire University states that “Systems thinking is a holistic way to investigate factors and interactions that could contribute to a possible outcome. A mindset more than a prescribed practice, systems thinking provides an understanding of how individuals can work together in different types of teams and through that understanding, create the best possible processes to accomplish just about anything.” So, a TS is a system that is capable of “systems thinking,” as it should be able to “ … create [utilize] the best possible processes [and intelligence] to accomplish just about anything.” To achieve this capability, human-like thinking is required. A truly autonomous system must be one that is capable of human-like thinking. This paper will address “Thinking Autonomy” (TA) enabled by a “Thinking System.” It will describe an architecture with the elements required to achieve the “thinking” behavior: understanding, intellect, reason, decision, will. The paper will further describe the contents and functionality of these elements and how to implement them, including software capabilities needed. Finally, the paper will provide details of a software platform that enables TA, the NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS), and describe implementations of thinking systems. Thinking systems will enable a fundamental change how AI and autonomy are implemented. It will change from a “brute force” approach that results in one-time implementations that are minimally intelligent or autonomous to a “thinking” approach where implementations evolve continuously and enable powerful intelligence and autonomy on systems of high complexity as well as on systems-of-systems.

Thinking systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Autonomy Technologies for Systems of a Moon Base

The aim of the workshop is to “explore emerging autonomy technologies that could enable or enhance mission capabilities, reduce mission risk, and reduce mission cost.” Enhancing mission capabilities will depend on how capable and trustworthy the autonomy implemented is. As systems increase in complexity, and also with multiple interdependent/interacting systems, current autonomy capability and trustworthiness is very low. A paradigm and technology from NASA that addresses this shortcoming will be discussed, the NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS). NPAS also happens to address reduction of mission risk and cost. NPAS will be discussed as a capability that is reaching readiness for space use, but also serves as a reference to develop technologies suitable for integrated autonomous operations of lunar systems; encompassing autonomous systems, situational awareness, and reasoning and acting.

Autonomous systems↗
NASA NTRS2018

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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Designing for Advanced Aerial Mobility: Human-Autonomy Teaming and In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance

The continued growth of aviation shall require new innovative technologies and operational concepts to meet the ever-increasing demands on air transportation. The NASA Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project focuses on emerging aviation markets, such as Urban Air Mobility (UAM). UAM is defined as “...a safe and efficient system for air passenger and cargo transportation within an urban area. It is inclusive of small package delivery and other urban unmanned aerial system services and supports a mix of onboard/ground-piloted and increasingly autonomous operations” ([1]). The AAM project emphasizes technology development and validating system-level concepts and solutions in coordination with other NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) projects to enable UAM metro- and micro-plex vertiport and airspace concepts of operations. The NASA AAM research portfolio includes the concepts of Remote Supervisor-in-Command (RSC) and Fleet and Airspace Manager (FAM) as possible human roles for consumer fleet providers. NASA research in RSC is focused on development of guidelines and standards for remote pilots/operators passively and actively controlling a large fleet of autonomous aircraft. For FAM, flight and ground system concepts and technologies to enable high density homogeneous operations at increased scale from vertiport(s), and coordination with other humans in the systems (e.g., UAM urban airspace manager, Air Traffic Control) are key research areas. The envisioned UAM operations are posited to require autonomous systems to enable functions ranging from fleet and resource management to vehicle control. Although automation has become increasingly sophisticated and ubiquitous in civil aviation, autonomy represents a significant evolution in automation, which has generally been limited in functional scope and capability. As autonomy takes on increasing responsibilities, humans and machines will be required to work together in new and different ways [2], rather than traditional design approaches focused on how machines (i.e., autonomy) can do the work of people. The emerging field of human-autonomy teaming (HAT) represents a comprehensive and prioritized research-driven approach to enable the success of future emerging aviation market applications through capabilities and principles that facilitate humans and machine working and thinking better together. The NASA Transformational Tools and Technologies (TTT) Autonomous System (AS) Sub-project was created to assist with the transition into higher levels of autonomy to enable new modes of air transportation, such as UAM. TTT-AS has identified HAT as a key research need to enable UAM while maintaining today’s ultra-safe aviation system safety levels. The latter challenge has been taken up by the NASA System-Wide Safety (SWS) Project, which recognizes that aviation safety, as it evolves, shall require new ways of thinking about safety to include integration of a wide-range of existing and new safety systems and practices, enhanced tools and technologies, increased access to data and data fusion, improved data analysis capabilities, enhanced in-time risk monitoring and detection, hazard prioritization and mitigation, safety assurance decision-support, and in-time integrated system analytics [3].The operational concept of UAM represents a variety of work that has been termed, “work-as-imagined” to characterize the idea that how people think that work is done and how work is actually done are often not the same [4]. To ensure design success and system safety, looking at “work-as-done” provides a comparative approach toward UAM concept and technology design through examination of corresponding analogs found today in aviation (e.g., on-demand operations) and other transportation domains (e.g., port operations). The paper shall discuss various alternative applications with specific focus on airline operation center (AOC) operations, and unmanned aerial system (UAS) command-and-control to inform scaled-versions of FAM and RSC, respectively, and with consideration of the national airspace system contextual environment. The tenets and principles of the HAT field and current NASA research efforts under the TTT-AS sub-project shall also be described. Finally, the SWS sub-project efforts to develop In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) and In-Time Safety Management Systems (IASMS) are discussed in terms of how “in-time” safety assurance may be conceptualized for the on-demand mobility air taxi “work-as-imagined” operational concept [5]. As part of this effort, concepts from the emerging field of resilience engineering, are being studied. Traditional approaches to aviation safety have focused on what can go wrong and how to prevent it. Another approach to thinking about system safety should reflect not only “avoiding things that go wrong” (protective safety) but also “ensuring that things go right” (productive safety), that enables a system to exhibit the resilient performance [6] necessary for the success of the future aviation system emerging concepts of operations. The paper shall describe efforts focused on how productive safety and resilience may enable a more complete approach to system safety thinking and design of ISSA and IASMS for UAM. Future directions and research needs shall also be discussed.

resilience↗
NASA NTRS2000

Nanotechnology at NASA Ames

Advanced miniaturization, a key thrust area to enable new science and exploration missions, provides ultrasmall sensors, power sources, communication, navigation, and propulsion systems with very low mass, volume, and power consumption. Revolutions in electronics and computing will allow reconfigurable, autonomous, 'thinking' spacecraft. Nanotechnology presents a whole new spectrum of opportunities to build device components and systems for entirely new space architectures: (1) networks of ultrasmall probes on planetary surfaces; (2) micro-rovers that drive, hop, fly, and burrow; and (3) collections of microspacecraft making a variety of measurements.

Srivastava, Deepak↗
NASA NTRS2003

Sensory Motor Coordination in Robonaut

As a participant of the year 2000 NASA Summer Faculty Fellowship Program, I worked with the engineers of the Dexterous Robotics Laboratory at NASA Johnson Space Center on the Robonaut project. The Robonaut is an articulated torso with two dexterous arms, left and right five-fingered hands, and a head with cameras mounted on an articulated neck. This advanced space robot, now driven only teleoperatively using VR gloves, sensors and helmets, is to be upgraded to a thinking system that can find, interact with and assist humans autonomously, allowing the Crew to work with Robonaut as a (junior) member of their team. Thus, the work performed this summer was toward the goal of enabling Robonaut to operate autonomously as an intelligent assistant to astronauts. Our underlying hypothesis is that a robot can develop intelligence if it learns a set of basic behaviors (i.e., reflexes - actions tightly coupled to sensing) and through experience learns how to sequence these to solve problems or to accomplish higher-level tasks. We describe our approach to the automatic acquisition of basic behaviors as learning sensory-motor coordination (SMC). Although research in the ontogenesis of animals development from the time of conception) supports the approach of learning SMC as the foundation for intelligent, autonomous behavior, we do not know whether it will prove viable for the development of autonomy in robots. The first step in testing the hypothesis is to determine if SMC can be learned by the robot. To do this, we have taken advantage of Robonaut's teleoperated control system. When a person teleoperates Robonaut, the person's own SMC causes the robot to act purposefully. If the sensory signals that the robot detects during teleoperation are recorded over several repetitions of the same task, it should be possible through signal analysis to identify the sensory-motor couplings that accompany purposeful motion. In this report, reasons for suspecting SMC as the basis for intelligent behavior will be reviewed. A robot control system for autonomous behavior that uses learned SMC will be proposed. Techniques for the extraction of salient parameters from sensory and motor data will be discussed. Experiments with Robonaut will be discussed and preliminary data presented.

Peters, Richard Alan, II↗
NASA NTRS2020

A ROS-based Simulator for Testing the Enhanced Autonomous Navigation of the Mars 2020 Rover

In order to achieve the ambitious objectives of the Mars 2020 (M2020) mission, in particular the ability to autonomously traverse more challenging terrains more efficiently, new surface mobility software was developed for Enhanced Navigation (ENav). That decision was made early in the project, before most of the new surface flight software (FSW) existed, which created a need for a separate framework where the new navigation algorithms could be quickly prototyped and tested, before more realistic FSW-based testbeds became available. The JPL robotics team chose the Robot Operating System [1] (ROS) as the environment in which to test the new ENav algorithms. This made it possible to write the algorithms in the C language required by the FSW, so they could be directly ported over to the flight module later on, while leveraging all the C++ libraries and tools provided by ROS for simulation and testing. The ENav algorithms were developed as a separate C library, and stubs were used to replace any FSW-specific code, such as Event Reporting (EVRs) and data products (DPs). A ROS simulator was developed to generate a rich set of varied 3D terrains representative of the candidate Mars landing sites and simulate the physics of the rover motion, the point cloud perceived by the rover’s stereo vision system, and the new thinking-while-driving (TWD) navigation logic which directs the rover to drive autonomously to user-specified waypoints. To simulate the rover motion and perception, a ROS node was developed that uses a software library called HyperDrive Sim (HDSim), which is a wrapper for the Rover Sequencing and Visualization Program [2] (RSVP). That library provides roverterrain settling, realistic slip modelling, and camera rendering capability based on the rover’s NavCam machine vision models. To simulate the navigation logic, a ROS node was created that initializes and runs the ENav algorithms in a way that mimics the FSW execution, while also providing the capability to load and replay data products, including re-running the recorded inputs through the ENav algorithms for testing. An engineering Graphical User Interface (GUI) was also developed to visualize various elements, such as the rover pose during the drive, the simulated and perceived terrain, the selected local and global paths to the goal, the evaluated candidate paths and the reasons why they were rejected, the keep-in and keep-out zones (KIOZs), etc. Finally, an advanced Monte Carlo (MC) framework that can run many simulations in parallel on the Cloud and automatically generate reports that capture the key ENav performance metrics was developed to evaluate the system in a statisticallymeaningful way. This paper provides an overview of the ROSbased simulator used for testing the M2020 ENav algorithms.

Toupet, Olivier↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS)

NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS) is a disruptive software platform and processes being developed by SSC Autonomous Systems Laboratory (ASL). Autonomous operations are critical for the success, safety and crew survival of NASA deep space missions beyond low Earth orbit, including Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway, and for the future of cost-effective ground mission operations. NPAS represents the embodiment of an innovative implementation for "thinking" autonomy in contrast to brute-force autonomy. It also uniquely addresses the requirements and integrates five primary functionalities for autonomous operations including: (1) Integrated System Health Management (ISHM), (2) autonomy, guided by health and system concepts of operations; (3) knowledge models of applications; (4) infrastructure to create, schedule, and execute mission plans; and (5) infrastructure to integrate distributed autonomous applications across networks.

Figueroa, Fernando↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thinking outside the box: The human role in increasingly automated aviation systems

Rapid advances in artificial intelligence are enabling automated systems to operate in an increasingly autonomous manner in domains that previously required the involvement of human operators. Examples are rail transport systems, self-driving cars, and warehouse delivery systems. From time to time, such automation encounters operational conditions that fall outside a “competency box” within which the system has been designed to operate. Human operators add resilience because they can see and act outside the competency box of scenarios and environments for which the system was designed. The system’s competencies can be expanded over time with modifications to software, sensors, etc.; however, it is unclear at what point the competency box becomes large enough to safely eliminate the role of the human operator. One area where advanced automation may be applied is Urban Air Mobility (UAM). Current UAM concepts envision fleets of highly automated air vehicles providing on-demand transport for people and goods. A phased development of UAM has been proposed, beginning with on-board pilots and transitioning to a future state where automated vehicles operate with minimal human involvement. Proponents of UAM note that this final state reduces cost as well as eliminating pilot error, identified as a contributing factor in many aircraft accidents. However, eliminating human involvement also risks eliminating their positive contributions to system resilience. Here we examine Concepts of Operation proposed for future UAM systems and explore how humans can best be incorporated to maintain resilience while minimizing cost and risk. A human-autonomy teaming approach is suggested.

Advanced Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS)

NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS) is a disruptive software platform and processes being developed by the NASA Stennis Space Center (SSC) Autonomous Systems Laboratory (ASL). Autonomous operations are critical for the success, safety and crew survival of NASA deep space missions beyond low Earth orbit, including the Gateway, and for the future of cost-effective ground mission operations. NPAS represents the embodiment of an innovative paradigm for “thinking” autonomy in contrast to brute-force autonomy. NPAS uniquely addresses the requirements and integrates the primary functionalities for autonomous operations, in one platform that includes: (1) Integrated System Health Management (ISHM); (2) autonomy strategies, guided by system health and concepts of operations; (3) domain objects (system elements) and infrastructure to create complete application domain knowledge models (4) infrastructure to create, schedule, and execute mission plans; (5) infrastructure to develop user interfaces for comprehensive awareness; and (6) infrastructure to integrate distributed autonomous applications across networks. NPAS is a single platform that can be used to make any system operate with any desirable degree of autonomy, as well as provide comprehensive system awareness to operators and users.

Figueroa, Fernando↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Model-Based Systems Engineering, Real-Time Operations, and Autonomy

Model-Based Systems Engineering has been enabled by the development of the SysML language and software tools to create systems models. Systems models described in SysML incorporate frames (Diagrams) that represent behaviors (activities, sequences, state machines, use cases), requirements, and structure (definitions, internal structure, parametric formulation, and packaging). The SysML models are, in turn, used by applications to do analysis and studies of the designs and operational capabilities. These uses of the model are based on simulations, and do not include hardware. This paper presents a software environment and processes that enables more comprehensive systems models for MBSE, and use of these rich models for real-time operations. The paper describes a software platform that enables creation of comprehensive models, beyond what is now possible with SysML and related software tools, called the NASA Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS). The platform encapsulates a paradigm and infrastructure for creating systems models with complexity levels comparable to the ones handled by SysML software tools, but with additional fidelity that includes detailed design diagrams encompassing sensors, components, and design topologies. Furthermore, NPAS enables incorporation of data, information, and knowledge (DIaK) to implement autonomy and Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) and the inherent integration of content encompassing SysML structure and behavior diagrams throughout the NPAS modelAnd lastly, the NPAS models are used in real-time operations, taking advantage of the fidelity and complexity encompassed in the models in order to implement “thinking” ISHM and/or autonomous operations. . Incorporation of SysML model content into an NPAS model is briefly discussed.

MBSE↗
NASA NTRS2017

Lessons Learned from Applying Design Thinking in a NASA Rapid Design Study in Aeronautics

In late 2015, NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) funded an experiment in rapid design and rapid teaming to explore new approaches to solving challenging design problems in aeronautics in an effort to cultivate and foster innovation. This report summarizes several lessons learned from the rapid design portion of the study. This effort entailed learning and applying design thinking, a human-centered design approach, to complete the conceptual design for an open-ended design challenge within six months. The design challenge focused on creating a capability to advance experimental testing of autonomous aeronautics systems, an area of great interest to NASA, the US government as a whole, and an entire ecosystem of users and developers around the globe. A team of nine civil servant researchers from three of NASA's aeronautics field centers with backgrounds in several disciplines was assembled and rapidly trained in design thinking under the guidance of the innovation and design firm IDEO. The design thinking process, while used extensively outside the aerospace industry, is less common and even counter to many practices within the aerospace industry. In this report, several contrasts between common aerospace research and development practices and design thinking are discussed, drawing upon the lessons learned from the NASA rapid design study. The lessons discussed included working towards a design solution without a set of detailed design requirements, which may not be practical or even feasible for management to ascertain for complex, challenging problems. This approach allowed for the possibility of redesigning the original problem statement to better meet the needs of the users. Another lesson learned was to approach problems holistically from the perspective of the needs of individuals that may be affected by advances in topic area instead of purely from a technological feasibility viewpoint. The interdisciplinary nature of the design team also provided valuable experience by allowing team members from different technological backgrounds to work side-by-side instead of dividing into smaller teams, as is frequently done in traditional multidisciplinary design. The team also learned how to work with qualitative data obtained primarily through the 70-plus interviews that were conducted over the course of this project, which was a sharp contrast to using quantitative data with regards to identifying, capturing, analyzing, storing, and recalling the data. When identifying potential interviewees who may have useful contributions to the design subject area, the team found great value in talking to non-traditional users and potential beneficiaries of autonomous aeronautics systems whose impact on the aeronautics autonomy ecosystem is growing swiftly. Finally, the team benefitted from using "sacrificial prototyping," which is a method of rapidly prototyping draft concepts and ideas with the intent of enabling potential users to provide significant feedback early in the design process. This contrasts the more common approach of using expensive prototypes that focus on demonstrating technical feasibility. The unique design approach and lessons learned by the team throughout this process culminated in a final design concept that was quite different than what the team originally assumed would be the design concept initially. A summary of the more usercentered final design concept is also provided.

McGowan, Anna-Maria↗
NASA NTRS2018

Serious Gaming for Building a Basis of Certification via Trust and Trustworthiness of Autonomous Systems

Autonomous systems governed by a variety of adaptive and nondeterministic algorithms are being planned for inclusion into safety-critical environments, such as unmanned aircraft and space systems in both civilian and military applications. However, until autonomous systems are proven and perceived to be capable and resilient in the face of unanticipated conditions, humans will be reluctant or unable to delegate authority, remaining in control aided by machine-based information and decision support. Proving capability, or trustworthiness, is a necessary component of certification. Perceived capability is a component of trust. Trustworthiness is an attribute of a cyber-physical system that requires context-driven metrics to prove and certify. Trust is an attribute of the agents participating in the system and is gained over time and multiple interactions through trustworthy behavior and transparency. Historically, artificial intelligence and machine learning systems provide answers without explanation - without a rationale or insight into the machine “thinking”. In order to function as trusted teammates, machines must be able to explain their decisions and actions. This transparency is a product of both content and communication. NASA’s Autonomy Teaming & TRAjectories for Complex Trusted Operational Reliability (ATTRACTOR) project seeks to build a basis for certification of autonomous systems via establishing metrics for trustworthiness and trust in multi-agent team interactions, using AI (Artificial Intelligence) explainability and persistent modeling and simulation, in the context of mission planning and execution, with analyzable trajectories. Inspired by Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPG) and Serious Gaming, the proposed ATTRACTOR modeling and simulation environment is similar to online gaming environments in which player (aka agent) participants interact with each other, affect their environment, and expect the simulation to persist and change regardless of any individual agent’s active participation. This persistent simulation environment will accommodate individual agents, groups of self-organizing agents, and large-scale infrastructure behavior. The effects of the emerging adaptation and coevolution can be observed and measured to building a basis of measurable trustworthiness and trust, toward certification of safety-critical autonomous systems.

Allen, B. Danette↗
NASA NTRS2005

Cerebellum Augmented Rover Development

Bio-Inspired Technologies and Systems (BITS) are a very natural result of thinking about Nature's way of solving problems. Knowledge of animal behaviors an be used in developing robotic behaviors intended for planetary exploration. This is the expertise of the JFL BITS Group and has served as a philosophical model for NMSU RioRobolab. Navigation is a vital function for any autonomous system. Systems must have the ability to determine a safe path between their current location and some target location. The MER mission, as well as other JPL rover missions, uses a method known as dead-reckoning to determine position information. Dead-reckoning uses wheel encoders to sense the wheel's rotation. In a sandy environment such as Mars, this method is highly inaccurate because the wheels will slip in the sand. Improving positioning error will allow the speed of an autonomous navigating rover to be greatly increased. Therefore, local navigation based upon landmark tracking is desirable in planetary exploration. The BITS Group is developing navigation technology based upon landmark tracking. Integration of the current rover architecture with a cerebellar neural network tracking algorithm will demonstrate that this approach to navigation is feasible and should be implemented in future rover and spacecraft missions.

King, Matthew↗