Advanced air traffic automation: A case study in distributed decentralized control

  • Claire J. Tomlin
  • George J. Pappas
  • Jana Košecká
  • John Lygeros
  • Shankar S. Sastry
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences book series (LNCIS, volume 230)

Abstract

In this survey chapter, we present some of the issues in designing algorithms for the control of distributed, multi-agent systems. The control of such systems is becoming an increasing issue in many areas owing to technological advances which make it possible to take “legacy” systems to new levels of functioning and efficiency. Of specific interest to us in this chapter is advanced air traffic management (ATM) to increase the efficiency and safety of air travel while accommodating the growing demand for air traffic. ATM systems will replace the completely centralized, ground-based air traffic control procedures. Within ATM, the concept of free flight allows each aircraft to plan four dimensional trajectories in real time, thus replacing the rigid and inefficient discrete airspace structure. These changes are feasible due to technological innovations such as advanced flight management systems with GPS. In this chapter, we propose a decentralized ATM architecture, in which some of the current air traffic control functionality is moved on board aircraft. Within this framework, we present the issues in hybrid systems verification and design for safe conflict resolution strategies between aircraft. Both cooperative and noncooperative conflict resolution strategies are presented along with verification methods based on Hamilton-Jacobi theory, automata theory, and the theory of games.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Başar T, Olsder G J 1995 Dynamic Non-cooperative Game Theory. 2nd ed, Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Brudnicki D J, McFarland A L 1997 User request evaluation tool (URET) conflict probe performance and benefits assessment. In: Proc USA/Europe ATM Seminar. Eurocontrol, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Canny J, Reif J 1987 New lower bound techniques for robot motion planning problems. In: Proc 28th Annual IEEE Symp Found Comp Science. pp 49–60Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Couluris G J, Dorsky S 1995 Advanced air transportation technologies (AATT) potential benefits analysis. Tech Rep NASA Contract NAS2-13767, Seagull Technology Inc, Cupertino, CAGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Erdman M, Lozano-Perez T 1987 On multiple moving objects. Algorithmica. 2:477–595Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Erzberger H 1992 CTAS: Computer intelligence for air traffic control in the terminal area. Tech Rep NASA TM-103959, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CAGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Harman W H 1989 TCAS: A system for preventing midair collisions. Lincoln Lab J. 2:437–457Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Honeywell Inc 1996 Markets Report. Tech Rep NASA Contract NAS2-114279Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Honeywell Inc 1996 Technology and Procedures Report. Tech Rep NASA Contract NAS2-114279Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Isaacs R 1967 Differential Games. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Kahne S, Frolow I 1996 Air traffic management: Evolution with technology. IEEE Contr Syst Mag. 16(4):12–21Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Košecká J, Tomlin C, Pappas G, Sastry S 1997 Verification of cooperative conflict resolution maneuvers. Submitted to: Hybrid Systems V Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Krozel J, Mueller T, Hunter G 1996 Free flight conflict detection and resolution analysis. In: Proc AIAA Guid Navig Contr Conf. paper AIAA-96-3763Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Kuchar J K 1995 A unified methodology for the evaluation of hazard alerting systems. PhD thesis, Massachussets Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lygeros J, Tomlin C, Sastry S 1996 Multiobjective hybrid controller synthesis. In: Proc Int Work Hybrid Real-Time Syst. Grenoble, France, pp 109–123Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lygeros J, Tomlin C, Sastry S 1997 Multi-objective hybrid controller synthesis. In: Maler O (ed) Proc HART97. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, pp 109–123Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Masoud A 1996 Using hybrid vector-harmonic potential fields for multi-robot, multi-target navigation in stationary environment. In: Proc 1996 IEEE Int Conf Robot Automat. Minneapolis, MN, pp 3564–3571Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Mataric M J 1993 Issues and approaches in the design of collective autonomous agents. Robot Autonom Syst. 16:321–331Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Medio C D, Oriolo G 1991 Robot obstacle avoidance using vortex fields. In: Stifter S, Lenarčič (eds) Advances in Robot Kinematics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 227–235Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Paielli R A, Erzberger H 1996 Conflict probability estimation and resolution for free flight. NASA Ames Research Center, preprintGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Pappas G J, Lygeros J, Godbole D N 1995 Stabilization and tracking of feedback linearizable systems under input constraints. In: Proc 34th IEEE Conf Decision Contr. New Orleans, LA, pp 596–601Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Pappas G J, Sastry S 1997 Towards continuous abstractions of dynamical and control systems In: Antsaklis P, Kohn W, Nerode A, Sastry S (eds) Hybrid Systems IV, Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics 1995 Final report of RTCA task force 3: Free flight implementation. Tech Rep, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Shewchun M, Feron E 1997 Linear matrix inequalities for analysis of free flight conflict problems. In: 36th IEEE Conf Decision Contr. San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Tomlin C, Lygeros J, Benvenuti L, Sastry S 1995 Output tracking for a nonminimum phase dynamic CTOL aircraft model. In: Proc 34th IEEE Conf Decision Contr. New Orleans, LAGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Tomlin C, Pappas G, Sastry S 1997 Conflict resolution for air traffic management: A case study in multi-agent hybrid systems. Tech Rep UCB/ERL M97/33, University of California at Berkeley, to appear in IEEE Trans Automat Contr. Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Tomlin C, Sastry S 1995 Bounded tracking for nonminimum phase nonlinear systems with fast zero dynamics. In: Proc 35th IEEE Conf Decision Contr. Kobe, Japan, pp 2058–2063Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Zhao Y, Schultz R 1997 Deterministic resolution of two aircraft conflict in free flight In: Proc AIAA Guid Navig Contr Conf. New Orleans, LA, paper AIAA-97-3547Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claire J. Tomlin
    • 1
  • George J. Pappas
    • 1
  • Jana Košecká
    • 1
  • John Lygeros
    • 1
  • Shankar S. Sastry
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of California at BerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations