Advertisement

Knowledge acquisition for the onboard planner of an autonomous spacecraft

Long Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1319)

Abstract

Deep Space One (DS1) will be the first spacecraft to be controlled by an autonomous closed loop system potentially capable of carrying out a complete mission with minimal commanding from Earth. A major component of the autonomous flight software is an onboard planner/scheduler. Based on generative planning and temporal reasoning technologies, the planner/scheduler transforms abstract goals into detailed tasks to be executed within resource and time limits. This paper discusses the knowledge acquisition issues involved in transitioning this novel technology into spacecraft flight software, developing the planner in the context of a large software project and completing the work under a compressed development schedule. Our experience shows that the planning framework used is adequate to address the challenges of DS1 and future autonomous spacecraft systems, and it points to a series of open technological challenges in developing methodologies and tools for knowledge acquisition and validation.

Keywords

Knowledge Acquisition Mission Manager Mission Profile Flight Software Knowledge Acquisition Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barry Boehm. A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement. Computer, pages 61–72, May 1988.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Michael Compton, Helen Stewart, Vinod Baya, Martha Del Alto, Bob Kanefsky, and Jason Vincent. Electronic collaboration for the New Millenium: Internet-based Tools and Techniques for Sharing Information. In http://ic-www.arc.nasa.gov/ic/projects/nmp-doc/nmp-doc-pres.pdf, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Per Cederqvist et.al. Concurrent Versions System. In http://www.loria.fr/ molli/cvs-index.html, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Oren Etzioni. Acquiring Search Control Knowledge via Static Analysis. Artificial Intelligence, 62, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G.M.Brown, D.Bernard, and R.Rasmussen. Attitude and Articulation Control for the Cassini Spacecraft. a fault tolerance overview. In 14th AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Conference, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barbara Hayes-Roth. An Architecture for Adaptive Intelligent Systems. Artificial Intelligence, 72, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IEEE. Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Snowmass, CO, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sanford Krasner and Douglas E. Bernard.Integrating Autonomy Technologies into an Embedded Spacecraft System—Flight Software System Engineering for New Millennium. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference [7].Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Steven Minton. Automatically configuring constraint satisfaction programs: A case study. Constraints, 1(1), 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nicola Muscettola. HSTS: Integrating planning and scheduling. In Mark Fox and Monte Zweben, editors, Intelligent Scheduling. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nicola Muscettola, Ben Smith, Charles Fry, Steve Chien, Kanna Rajan, Gregg Rabideau, and David Yan. On-Board Planning for New Millennium Deep Space One Autonomy. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference [7].Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barney Pell, Douglas E. Bernard, Steve A. Chien, Erann Gat, Nicola Muscettola, P. Pandurang Nayak, Michael D. Wagner, and Brian C. Williams. A Remote Agent Prototype for Spacecraft Autonomy. In Proceedings of the SPIE Conference on Optical Science, Engineering, and Instrumentation, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barney Pell, Douglas E. Bernard, Steve A. Chien, Erann Gat, Nicola Muscettola, P. Pandurang Nayak, Michael D. Wagner, and Brian C. Williams. An Autonomous Spacecraft Agent Prototype. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents. ACM Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barney Pell, Erann Gat, Ron Keesing, Nicola Muscettola, and Ben Smith. Plan Execution for Autonomous Spacecraft. In Louise Pryor, editor, Procs. of the AAAI Fall Symposium on Plan Execution. AAAI Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Tambe, W. Lewis Johnson, R. M. Jones, F. Koss, J. E. Laird, Paul S. Rosenbloom, and K. Schwamb. Intelligent Agents for Interactive Simulation Environments. AI Magazine, 16(1):15–39, Spring 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brian C. Williams and P. Pandurang Nayak. A model-based approach to reactive self-configuring systems. In Procs. of AAAI-96, pages 971–978, Cambridge, Mass., 1996. AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brian C. Williams and P. Pandurang Nayak. Immobile Robots, AI in the New Millennium. AI Magazine, Fall, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jet Propulsion LaboratoryCalifornia Institute of TechnologyPasadena
  2. 2.NASA Ames Research CenterMoffett Field

Personalised recommendations