Decision-making for a robotic architecture
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
robotic architecture planning scheduling execution↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “robotic architecture planning scheduling execution”
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.
Decision making in a robotic architecture for autonomy
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
robot autonomy robotic architecture planning sched↗
CLEaR: Closed Loop Execution and Recovery High-Level Onboard Autonomy for Rover Operations
This viewgraph presentation covers the following topics: Coupled Layer Architecture for Robotic Autonomy CLARAty system at the functional layer and the decision layer; and CLEaR - AI Planning and Schedule - Task Based Control, A demonstration is of the operation of the system is given, with viewgraphs of the rover movement control.
planning↗
Current results from a Rover Science Data Analysis System
In this paper, we provide a brief overview of the OASIS system, and then describe our recent successes in integrating with and using rover hardware. OASIS currently works in a closed loop fashion with onboard control software (e.g., navigation and vision) and has the ability to autonomously perform the following sequence of steps: analyze gray scale images to find rocks, extract the properties of the rocks, identify rocks of interest, retask the rover to take additional imagery of the identified target and then allow the rover to continue on its original mission. We also describe the early 2004 ground test validation of specific OASIS components on selected Mars Exploration Rover (MER) images. These components include the rockfinding algorithm, RockIT, and the rock size feature extraction code. Our team also developed the RockIT GUI, an interface that allows users to easily visualize and modify the rock-finder results. This interface has allowed us to conduct preliminary testing and validation of the rockfinder's performance.
Coupled Layer Architecture for Robotic Autonomy (C↗
Decision-making in a robotic architecture for autonomy
This paper presents an overview of the intelligent decison-making capabilities of the CLARAty robotic architecture for autonomy.
autonomy robotics planning scheduling execution↗
Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0 Study: Executive Summary
The NASA Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0 Study seeks to update its long term goals and objective for human exploration missions; flight and surface systems for human missions and supporting infrastructure; operational concept for human and robotic exploration of Mars; key challenges including risk and cost drivers; and, its development schedule options. It additionally seeks to assess strategic linkages between lunar and Mars strategies and develop and understanding of methods for reducing the cost/risk of human Mars missions through investment in research, technology development, and synergy with other exploration plans. Recommendations are made regarding conjunction class (long-stay) missions which are seen as providing the best balance of cost, risk, and performance. Additionally, this study reviews entry, descent, and landing challenges; in-space transportation systems; launch vehicle and Orion assessments; risk and risk mitigation; key driving requirements and challenges; and, lunar linkages.
Drake, Bret G.↗
FRESCO: A Framework for Spacecraft Systems Autonomy
Achieving the science exploration and defense goals of the following decades will require flight systems capable of operations with limited operator contact, system mode changes and retasking based on sensor data, and complex robotic operations. To support these capabilities, increasingly autonomous flight systems are required that can perform dedicated mission functions, e.g. payload targeting and communications, and system-level functions, e.g. planning and goal monitoring. Architecting an autonomous system requires a well-reasoned, self-consistent framework to avoid \textit{ad hoc} design choices that will introduce complexity and risk. The Framework for Robust Execution and Scheduling of Commands On-Board, FRESCO, is the result of lessons learned in developing a software architecture to enable autonomous solar system exploration. FRESCO generalizes this work to offer a modular, software-agnostic approach to developing verifiable architecture for autonomous space systems. FRESCO specifies guiding principles, functions, interfaces, and interactions from which mission-specific autonomous control architectures can be derived. FRESCO is a principled framework relying on explicit, state-based goal definitions, centralized management of state knowledge, clearly separated control boundaries, and hierarchical reasoning. Using components from FRESCO reference architecture, an autonomous decision-making architecture can be designed for spacecraft which can then be mapped to flight software architecture. FRESCO is flexibly defined to enable autonomous control of flight systems built using extensive software and hardware heritage. Finally, FRESCO-derived architectures support a spectrum of operator/spacecraft interactions, ranging from traditional commanding to goal-driven commanding with the ability to change mission goals autonomously. FRESCO has been used in defining the autonomy architectures for the ASTERIA mission and have been demonstrated in laboratory and software simulation for small body rendezvous and in-space servicing missions.
Kolcio, Ksenia↗
Planning and Execution: The Spirit of Opportunity for Robust Autonomous Systems
One of the most exciting endeavors pursued by human kind is the search for life in the Solar System and the Universe at large. NASA is leading this effort by designing, deploying and operating robotic systems that will reach planets, planet moons, asteroids and comets searching for water, organic building blocks and signs of past or present microbial life. None of these missions will be achievable without substantial advances in.the design, implementation and validation of autonomous control agents. These agents must be capable of robustly controlling a robotic explorer in a hostile environment with very limited or no communication with Earth. The talk focuses on work pursued at the NASA Ames Research center ranging from basic research on algorithm to deployed mission support systems. We will start by discussing how planning and scheduling technology derived from the Remote Agent experiment is being used daily in the operations of the Spirit and Opportunity rovers. Planning and scheduling is also used as the fundamental paradigm at the core of our research in real-time autonomous agents. In particular, we will describe our efforts in the Intelligent Distributed Execution Architecture (IDEA), a multi-agent real-time architecture that exploits artificial intelligence planning as the core reasoning engine of an autonomous agent. We will also describe how the issue of plan robustness at execution can be addressed by novel constraint propagation algorithms capable of giving the tightest exact bounds on resource consumption or all possible executions of a flexible plan.
Muscettola, Nicola↗
Robotic and Human-Tended Collaborative Drilling Automation for Subsurface Exploration
Future in-situ lunar/martian resource utilization and characterization, as well as the scientific search for life on Mars, will require access to the subsurface and hence drilling. Drilling on Earth is hard - an art form more than an engineering discipline. Human operators listen and feel drill string vibrations coming from kilometers underground. Abundant mass and energy make it possible for terrestrial drilling to employ brute-force approaches to failure recovery and system performance issues. Space drilling will require intelligent and autonomous systems for robotic exploration and to support human exploration. Eventual in-situ resource utilization will require deep drilling with probable human-tended operation of large-bore drills, but initial lunar subsurface exploration and near-term ISRU will be accomplished with lightweight, rover-deployable or standalone drills capable of penetrating a few tens of meters in depth. These lightweight exploration drills have a direct counterpart in terrestrial prospecting and ore-body location, and will be designed to operate either human-tended or automated. NASA and industry now are acquiring experience in developing and building low-mass automated planetary prototype drills to design and build a pre-flight lunar prototype targeted for 2011-12 flight opportunities. A successful system will include development of drilling hardware, and automated control software to operate it safely and effectively. This includes control of the drilling hardware, state estimation of both the hardware and the lithography being drilled and state of the hole, and potentially planning and scheduling software suitable for uncertain situations such as drilling. Given that Humans on the Moon or Mars are unlikely to be able to spend protracted EVA periods at a drill site, both human-tended and robotic access to planetary subsurfaces will require some degree of standalone, autonomous drilling capability. Human-robotic coordination will be important, either between a robotic drill and humans on Earth, or a human-tended drill and its visiting crew. The Mars Analog Rio Tinto Experiment (MARTE) is a current project that studies and simulates the remote science operations between an automated drill in Spain and a distant, distributed human science team. The Drilling Automation for Mars Exploration (DAME) project, by contrast: is developing and testing standalone automation at a lunar/martian impact crater analog site in Arctic Canada. The drill hardware in both projects is a hardened, evolved version of the Advanced Deep Drill (ADD) developed by Honeybee Robotics for the Mars Subsurface Program. The current ADD is capable of 20m, and the DAME project is developing diagnostic and executive software for hands-off surface operations of the evolved version of this drill. The current drill automation architecture being developed by NASA and tested in 2004-06 at analog sites in the Arctic and Spain will add downhole diagnosis of different strata, bit wear detection, and dynamic replanning capabilities when unexpected failures or drilling conditions are discovered in conjunction with simulated mission operations and remote science planning. The most important determinant of future 1unar and martian drilling automation and staffing requirements will be the actual performance of automated prototype drilling hardware systems in field trials in simulated mission operations. It is difficult to accurately predict the level of automation and human interaction that will be needed for a lunar-deployed drill without first having extensive experience with the robotic control of prototype drill systems under realistic analog field conditions. Drill-specific failure modes and software design flaws will become most apparent at this stage. DAME will develop and test drill automation software and hardware under stressful operating conditions during several planned field campaigns. Initial results from summer 2004 tests show seven identifi distinct failure modes of the drill: cuttings-removal issues with low-power drilling into permafrost, and successful steps at executive control and initial automation.
Glass, Brian↗
Autonomous Rovers for Mars Exploration
Rovers will play a critical role in the exploration of Mars. Near-term mission plans call for long traverses over unknown terrain, robust navigation and instrument placement, and reliable operations for extended periods of time. Longer-term missions may visit multiple science sites in a single day and perform opportunistic science data collection, as well as complex scouting, construction, and maintenance tasks in preparation for an eventual human presence. The Pathfinder mission demonstrated the potential for robotic Mars exploration but at the same time indicated the need for more rover autonomy. The highly ground-intensive control with infrequent communication and high latency limited the effectiveness of the Sojourner rover. When failures occurred, Sojourner often sat idle for extended periods of time, awaiting further commands from earth. In future missions, the tasks will be more complex and extended; hence there will be even more situations where things do not go exactly as planned. Significant advances in rover autonomy are needed to cope with increasing task complexity and greater execution uncertainty. Towards this end, we have designed an on-board executive architecture that incorporates robust operation, resource utilization, and failure recovery. In addition, we have designed ground tools to produce and refine contingent schedules that take advantage of the on-board architecture's flexible execution characteristics. Together, the on-board executive and the ground tools constitute an integrated rover autonomy architecture. This work draws from our experience with the Deep Space One autonomy experiment, with enhancements to ensure robust operation in the face of the unpredictable, complex environment that the rover will encounter on Mars. The rover autonomy architecture is currently being developed and deployed on the Marsokhod rover platform at NASA Ames Research Center. The capabilities of the rover autonomy architecture to support autonomous operations will be demonstrated concretely in upcoming field tests.
Anderson, Corin↗
Enabling New Operations Concepts for Lunar and Mars Exploration
The planning and scheduling of human space activities is an expensive and time-consuming task that seldom provides the crew with the control, flexibility, or insight that they need. During the past thirty years, scheduling software has seen only incremental improvements; however, software limitations continue to prevent even evolutionary improvements in the operations concept that is used for human space missions. Space missions are planned on the ground long before they are executed in space, and the crew has little input or influence on the schedule. In recent years the crew has been presented with a job jar of activities that they can do whenever they have time, but the contents of the jar is limited to tasks that do not use scarce shared resources and do not have external timing constraints. Consequently, the crew has no control over the schedule of the majority of their own tasks. As humans venture farther from earth for longer durations, it will become imperative that they have the ability to plan and schedule not only their own activities, but also the unattended activities of the systems, equipment, and robots on the journey with them. Significant software breakthroughs are required to enable the change in the operations concept. The crew does not have the time to build or modify the schedule by hand. They only need to issue a request to schedule a task and the system should automatically do the rest. Of course, the crew should not be required to build the complete schedule. Controllers on the ground should contribute the models and schedules where they have the better knowledge. The system must allow multiple simultaneous users, some on earth and some in space. The Mission Operations Laboratory at NASA's Marshall Space flight Center has been researching and prototyping a modeling schema, scheduling engine, and system architecture that can enable the needed paradigm shift - it can make the crew autonomous. This schema and engine can be the core of a planning and scheduling system that would enable multiple planners, some on the earth and some in space, to build one integrated timeline. Its modeling schema can capture all the task requirements; its scheduling engine can build the schedule automatically, and its architecture can allow those (on earth and in space) with the best knowledge of the tasks to schedule them. This paper describes the enabling technology and proposes an operations concept for astronauts autonomously scheduling their activities and the activities around them.
Jaap, John↗