Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Planning Scheduling Algorithms”

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 NTRS2011

Options for Parallelizing a Planning and Scheduling Algorithm

Space missions have a growing interest in putting multi-core processors onboard spacecraft. For many missions processing power significantly slows operations. We investigate how continual planning and scheduling algorithms can exploit multi-core processing and outline different potential design decisions for a parallelized planning architecture. This organization of choices and challenges helps us with an initial design for parallelizing the CASPER planning system for a mesh multi-core processor. This work extends that presented at another workshop with some preliminary results.

parallel algorithms↗
NASA NTRS1976

Scheduling algorithm for mission planning and logistics evaluation users' guide

The scheduling algorithm for mission planning and logistics evaluation (SAMPLE) program is a mission planning tool composed of three subsystems; the mission payloads subsystem (MPLS), which generates a list of feasible combinations from a payload model for a given calendar year; GREEDY, which is a heuristic model used to find the best traffic model; and the operations simulation and resources scheduling subsystem (OSARS), which determines traffic model feasibility for available resources. The SAMPLE provides the user with options to allow the execution of MPLS, GREEDY, GREEDY-OSARS, or MPLS-GREEDY-OSARS.

Chang, H.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Set covering algorithm, a subprogram of the scheduling algorithm for mission planning and logistic evaluation

A computer program using Lemke, Salkin and Spielberg's Set Covering Algorithm (SCA) to optimize a traffic model problem in the Scheduling Algorithm for Mission Planning and Logistics Evaluation (SAMPLE) was documented. SCA forms a submodule of SAMPLE and provides for input and output, subroutines, and an interactive feature for performing the optimization and arranging the results in a readily understandable form for output.

Chang, H.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Scheduling Algorithm for Mission Planning and Logistics Evaluation (SAMPLE). Volume 3: The GREEDY algorithm

The functional specifications, functional design and flow, and the program logic of the GREEDY computer program are described. The GREEDY program is a submodule of the Scheduling Algorithm for Mission Planning and Logistics Evaluation (SAMPLE) program and has been designed as a continuation of the shuttle Mission Payloads (MPLS) program. The MPLS uses input payload data to form a set of feasible payload combinations; from these, GREEDY selects a subset of combinations (a traffic model) so all payloads can be included without redundancy. The program also provides the user a tutorial option so that he can choose an alternate traffic model in case a particular traffic model is unacceptable.

Dupnick, E.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Using a Portfolio of Algorithms for Planning and Scheduling

The Automated Scheduling and Planning Environment (ASPEN) software system, aspects of which have been reported in several previous NASA Tech Briefs articles, includes a subsystem that utilizes a portfolio of heuristic algorithms that work synergistically to solve problems. The nature of the synergy of the specific algorithms is that their likelihoods of success are negatively correlated: that is, when a combination of them is used to solve a problem, the probability that at least one of them will succeed is greater than the sum of probabilities of success of the individual algorithms operating independently of each other. In ASPEN, the portfolio of algorithms is used in a planning process of the iterative repair type, in which conflicts are detected and addressed one at a time until either no conflicts exist or a user-defined time limit has been exceeded. At each choice point (e.g., selection of conflict; selection of method of resolution of conflict; or choice of move, addition, or deletion) ASPEN makes a stochastic choice of a combination of algorithms from the portfolio. This approach makes it possible for the search to escape from looping and from solutions that are locally but not globally optimum.

Sherwood, Robert↗
NASA NTRS1980

Scheduling Algorithm for Mission Planning and Logistics Evaluation (SAMPLE). Volume 1: User's guide

An interactive computer program for automatically generating traffic models for the Space Transportation System (STS) is presented. Information concerning run stream construction, input data, and output data is provided. The flow of the interactive data stream is described. Error messages are specified, along with suggestions for remedial action. In addition, formats and parameter definitions for the payload data set (payload model), feasible combination file, and traffic model are documented.

Dupnick, E.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Working Notes from the 1992 AAAI Spring Symposium on Practical Approaches to Scheduling and Planning

The symposium presented issues involved in the development of scheduling systems that can deal with resource and time limitations. To qualify, a system must be implemented and tested to some degree on non-trivial problems (ideally, on real-world problems). However, a system need not be fully deployed to qualify. Systems that schedule actions in terms of metric time constraints typically represent and reason about an external numeric clock or calendar and can be contrasted with those systems that represent time purely symbolically. The following topics are discussed: integrating planning and scheduling; integrating symbolic goals and numerical utilities; managing uncertainty; incremental rescheduling; managing limited computation time; anytime scheduling and planning algorithms, systems; dependency analysis and schedule reuse; management of schedule and plan execution; and incorporation of discrete event techniques.

Drummond, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2002

Design and architecture of the Mars relay network planning and analysis framework

In this paper we describe the design and architecture of the Mars Network planning and analysis framework that supports generation and validation of efficient planning and scheduling strategy. The goals are to minimize the transmitting time, minimize the delaying time, and/or maximize the network throughputs. The proposed framework would require (1) a client-server architecture to support interactive, batch, WEB, and distributed analysis and planning applications for the relay network analysis scheme, (2) a high-fidelity modeling and simulation environment that expresses link capabilities between spacecraft to spacecraft and spacecraft to Earth stations as time-varying resources, and spacecraft activities, link priority, Solar System dynamic events, the laws of orbital mechanics, and other limiting factors as spacecraft power and thermal constraints, (3) an optimization methodology that casts the resource and constraint models into a standard linear and nonlinear constrained optimization problem that lends itself to commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)planning and scheduling algorithms.

Mars relay network planning analysis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Planning Bias: Planning as a Source of Sampling Bias

Many data-driven planning methods are trained on data generated by planners. It is well known that many statistical learning methods are sensitive to sampling bias, and yet there has been little or no attention to planning as a sampling method and its role in introducing sampling bias into planner-generated training data. Recently, it has been demonstrated that A**,* in the presence of problems with variable heuristic error, prefers some solutions over other equally cost-optimal solutions. But, as we discuss in this paper, mitigation may not be as simple as resolving arbitrary tie-breaking by sampling from ties uniformly at random. In this paper, we formalize an intuition of planning bias. We focus on problems which output a single solution. Diverse planning only complicates the problem by generalizing it to bias in the set of sets; we show how it is subject to bias in the single solution. We make some useful observations about deterministic algorithms in contrast to non-deterministic algorithms. We explain how information entropy may be a good way to measure planning bias, and discuss some issues in evaluating practical approaches to measurement. We address the intuition that uniform random tiebreaking should mitigate bias; and sketch a novel approach to constructing an appropriate random distribution for duplicate detection during forward search for unbiased A*. Finally, we suggest directions for future work.

Planning Scheduling Algorithms↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Bias in Planning Algorithms

Does bias exist in planning algorithms? If so, how does bias manifest, and how important is this bias? Answering this question requires a formal, mathematical definition of bias. We formally define bias as the distance between the probability distributions of solutions returned by various algorithms, and the uniform distribution over solutions. We show in this paper that deterministic algorithms are inherently biased, as they don’t return all solutions, and that this property holds even when algorithms return a set of plans instead of just one plan. Exceptions are problem instances or problem classes for which only a single solution exists. We then discuss changing the definition of bias to compare the probability distributions of properties of sets of plans instead of individual plans. We show the property bias is smaller than the bias of actual plans. Finally, we show that entropy is a proxy for the more complex and more expensive distance measurement between pairs of probability distributions. We then describe a roadmap for future investigations of bias in planning.

Planning Scheduling Algorithms↗
NASA NTRS2004

Planning for rover opportunistic science

The Mars Exploration Rover Spirit recently set a record for the furthest distance traveled in a single sol on Mars. Future planetary exploration missions are expected to use even longer drives to position rovers in areas of high scientific interest. This increase provides the potential for a large rise in the number of new science collection opportunities as the rover traverses the Martian surface. In this paper, we describe the OASIS system, which provides autonomous capabilities for dynamically identifying and pursuing these science opportunities during longrange traverses. OASIS uses machine learning and planning and scheduling techniques to address this goal. Machine learning techniques are applied to analyze data as it is collected and quickly determine new science gods and priorities on these goals. Planning and scheduling techniques are used to alter the behavior of the rover so that new science measurements can be performed while still obeying resource and other mission constraints. We will introduce OASIS and describe how planning and scheduling algorithms support opportunistic science.

artificial intelligence↗
NASA NTRS2004

An Enabling Technology for New Planning and Scheduling Paradigms

The Night Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called ?ask models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that are to be scheduled. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next, a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, the models are modified to be compatible with the scheduling engine. Then the models are submitted to the scheduling engine for automatic scheduling or, when requirements are expressed in notes, the timeline is built manually. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components: (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphical methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm that can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) An innovative architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the remote users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.

Jaap, John↗
NASA NTRS2004

Enabling a New Planning and Scheduling Paradigm

The Flight Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called "tasks models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that they want to be done. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, another cadre further modifies the models to be compatible with the scheduling engine. This last cadre also submits the models to the scheduling engine or builds the timeline manually to accommodate requirements that are expressed in notes. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components. (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphics methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm which can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) A web-based architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.

Jaap, John↗
NASA NTRS1990

Analysis of sequencing and scheduling methods for arrival traffic

The air traffic control subsystem that performs scheduling is discussed. The function of the scheduling algorithms is to plan automatically the most efficient landing order and to assign optimally spaced landing times to all arrivals. Several important scheduling algorithms are described and the statistical performance of the scheduling algorithms is examined. Scheduling brings order to an arrival sequence for aircraft. First-come-first-served scheduling (FCFS) establishes a fair order, based on estimated times of arrival, and determines proper separations. Because of the randomness of the traffic, gaps will remain in the scheduled sequence of aircraft. These gaps are filled, or partially filled, by time-advancing the leading aircraft after a gap while still preserving the FCFS order. Tightly scheduled groups of aircraft remain with a mix of heavy and large aircraft. Separation requirements differ for different types of aircraft trailing each other. Advantage is taken of this fact through mild reordering of the traffic, thus shortening the groups and reducing average delays. Actual delays for different samples with the same statistical parameters vary widely, especially for heavy traffic.

Neuman, Frank↗
NASA NTRS1989

Efficient scheduling algorithm for demand-assigned TDMA satellite systems

An efficient scheduling algorithm (stations burst plan) for demand-assigned time-division multiple-access (TDMA) satellite network systems is introduced. The total demand for transmitting data through a transponder may exceed the available bit-rate capacity, and a scheduler of the system wishes to utilize the system with minimum changes of slot allocations while maximizing throughputs. By implementing such a burst-plan algorithm, transmission of all demanded data traffic can be completed with minimum unused resources (idle slots). The underlying ideas adopted for the algorithm are that jobs with shorter remaining processing times should have higher priorities and that as many jobs are processed at a time as possible. The algorithm is particularly useful for deriving smooth burst plans for a satellite system with a large number of ground stations.

Durrani, Sajjad H.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Progress in Scheduling Algorithms for a Collaborative Distributed System for Flight Planning

This Technical Memorandum describes four contributions made by the authors to a larger team effort toward developing a distributed system for scheduling commercial flights at navigation fixes and/or airport runways. These contributions are as follows: (1) a proof of correctness for a scheduling algorithm published previously by Meyn, (2) an improvement of Meyn's algorithm from quadratic to linear time, (3) two independent implementations of the algorithm with test results identical to those published, and (4) an extension of Meyn's algorithm to support minimum usable time intervals.

arrival scheduling↗
NASA NTRS1976

Mission payloads subsystem description, revision 2

The Mission Payloads Subsystem (MPLS) which utilizes a simplified trajectory model to generate a list of missions for the Scheduling Algorithm for Mission Planning and Logistics Evaluation (SAMPLE) program is described. The MPLS is the mechanism that forms the basis of input for the other subsystems of SAMPLE and various post processors.

Williams, J. M.↗