Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “semantic refinement operations”

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.

An overview of the NASA electronic components information management system

The NASA Parts Project Office (NPPO) comprehensive data system to support all NASA Electric, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts management and technical data requirements is described. A phase delivery approach is adopted, comprising four principal phases. Phases 1 and 2 support Space Station Freedom (SSF) and use a centralized architecture with all data and processing kept on a mainframe computer. Phases 3 and 4 support all NASA centers and projects and implement a distributed system architecture, in which data and processing are shared among networked database servers. The Phase 1 system, which became operational in February of 1990, implements a core set of functions. Phase 2, scheduled for release in 1991, adds functions to the Phase 1 system. Phase 3, to be prototyped beginning in 1991 and delivered in 1992, introduces a distributed system, separate from the Phase 1 and 2 system, with a refined semantic data model. Phase 4 extends the data model and functionality of the Phase 3 system to provide support for the NASA design community, including integration with Computer Aided Design (CAD) environments. Phase 4 is scheduled for prototyping in 1992 to 93 and delivery in 1994.

Kramer, G.↗

Automatic Generation of Algorithms for the Statistical Analysis of Planetary Nebulae Images

Analyzing data sets collected in experiments or by observations is a Core scientific activity. Typically, experimentd and observational data are &aught with uncertainty, and the analysis is based on a statistical model of the conjectured underlying processes, The large data volumes collected by modern instruments make computer support indispensible for this. Consequently, scientists spend significant amounts of their time with the development and refinement of the data analysis programs. AutoBayes [GF+02, FS03] is a fully automatic synthesis system for generating statistical data analysis programs. Externally, it looks like a compiler: it takes an abstract problem specification and translates it into executable code. Its input is a concise description of a data analysis problem in the form of a statistical model as shown in Figure 1; its output is optimized and fully documented C/C++ code which can be linked dynamically into the Matlab and Octave environments. Internally, however, it is quite different: AutoBayes derives a customized algorithm implementing the given model using a schema-based process, and then further refines and optimizes the algorithm into code. A schema is a parameterized code template with associated semantic constraints which define and restrict the template s applicability. The schema parameters are instantiated in a problem-specific way during synthesis as AutoBayes checks the constraints against the original model or, recursively, against emerging sub-problems. AutoBayes schema library contains problem decomposition operators (which are justified by theorems in a formal logic in the domain of Bayesian networks) as well as machine learning algorithms (e.g., EM, k-Means) and nu- meric optimization methods (e.g., Nelder-Mead simplex, conjugate gradient). AutoBayes augments this schema-based approach by symbolic computation to derive closed-form solutions whenever possible. This is a major advantage over other statistical data analysis systems which use numerical approximations even in cases where closed-form solutions exist. AutoBayes is implemented in Prolog and comprises approximately 75.000 lines of code. In this paper, we take one typical scientific data analysis problem-analyzing planetary nebulae images taken by the Hubble Space Telescope-and show how AutoBayes can be used to automate the implementation of the necessary anal- ysis programs. We initially follow the analysis described by Knuth and Hajian [KHO2] and use AutoBayes to derive code for the published models. We show the details of the code derivation process, including the symbolic computations and automatic integration of library procedures, and compare the results of the automatically generated and manually implemented code. We then go beyond the original analysis and use AutoBayes to derive code for a simple image segmentation procedure based on a mixture model which can be used to automate a manual preproceesing step. Finally, we combine the original approach with the simple segmentation which yields a more detailed analysis. This also demonstrates that AutoBayes makes it easy to combine different aspects of data analysis.

Fischer, Bernd↗

The Role of Ontologies in Schema-based Program Synthesis

Program synthesis is the process of automatically deriving executable code from (non-executable) high-level specifications. It is more flexible and powerful than conventional code generation techniques that simply translate algorithmic specifications into lower-level code or only create code skeletons from structural specifications (such as UML class diagrams). Key to building a successful synthesis system is specializing to an appropriate application domain. The AUTOBAYES and AUTOFILTER systems, under development at NASA Ames, operate in the two domains of data analysis and state estimation, respectively. The central concept of both systems is the schema, a representation of reusable computational knowledge. This can take various forms, including high-level algorithm templates, code optimizations, datatype refinements, or architectural information. A schema also contains applicability conditions that are used to determine when it can be applied safely. These conditions can refer to the initial specification, to intermediate results, or to elements of the partially-instantiated code. Schema-based synthesis uses AI technology to recursively apply schemas to gradually refine a specification into executable code. This process proceeds in two main phases. A front-end gradually transforms the problem specification into a program represented in an abstract intermediate code. A backend then compiles this further down into a concrete target programming language of choice. A core engine applies schemas on the initial problem specification, then uses the output of those schemas as the input for other schemas, until the full implementation is generated. Since there might be different schemas that implement different solutions to the same problem this process can generate an entire solution tree. AUTOBAYES and AUTOFILTER have reached the level of maturity where they enable users to solve interesting application problems, e.g., the analysis of Hubble Space Telescope images. They are large (in total around 100kLoC Prolog), knowledge intensive systems that employ complex symbolic reasoning to generate a wide range of non-trivial programs for complex application do- mains. Their schemas can have complex interactions, which make it hard to change them in isolation or even understand what an existing schema actually does. Adding more capabilities by increasing the number of schemas will only worsen this situation, ultimately leading to the entropy death of the synthesis system. The root came of this problem is that the domain knowledge is scattered throughout the entire system and only represented implicitly in the schema implementations. In our current work, we are addressing this problem by making explicit the knowledge from Merent parts of the synthesis system. Here; we discuss how Gruber's definition of an ontology as an explicit specification of a conceptualization matches our efforts in identifying and explicating the domain-specific concepts. We outline the dual role ontologies play in schema-based synthesis and argue that they address different audiences and serve different purposes. Their first role is descriptive: they serve as explicit documentation, and help to understand the internal structure of the system. Their second role is prescriptive: they provide the formal basis against which the other parts of the system (e.g., schemas) can be checked. Their final role is referential: ontologies also provide semantically meaningful "hooks" which allow schemas and tools to access the internal state of the program derivation process (e.g., fragments of the generated code) in domain-specific rather than language-specific terms, and thus to modify it in a controlled fashion. For discussion purposes we use AUTOLINEAR, a small synthesis system we are currently experimenting with, which can generate code for solving a system of linear equations, Az = b.

Bures, Tomas↗