Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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 NTRS2006

Genetic Algorithm for Optimization: Preprocessor and Algorithm

Genetic algorithm (GA) inspired by Darwin's theory of evolution and employed to solve optimization problems - unconstrained or constrained - uses an evolutionary process. A GA has several parameters such the population size, search space, crossover and mutation probabilities, and fitness criterion. These parameters are not universally known/determined a priori for all problems. Depending on the problem at hand, these parameters need to be decided such that the resulting GA performs the best. We present here a preprocessor that achieves just that, i.e., it determines, for a specified problem, the foregoing parameters so that the consequent GA is a best for the problem. We stress also the need for such a preprocessor both for quality (error) and for cost (complexity) to produce the solution. The preprocessor includes, as its first step, making use of all the information such as that of nature/character of the function/system, search space, physical/laboratory experimentation (if already done/available), and the physical environment. It also includes the information that can be generated through any means - deterministic/nondeterministic/graphics. Instead of attempting a solution of the problem straightway through a GA without having/using the information/knowledge of the character of the system, we would do consciously a much better job of producing a solution by using the information generated/created in the very first step of the preprocessor. We, therefore, unstintingly advocate the use of a preprocessor to solve a real-world optimization problem including NP-complete ones before using the statistically most appropriate GA. We also include such a GA for unconstrained function optimization problems.

Sen, S. K.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Improved Architectures and Training Algorithms for Deep Operator Networks

Operator learning techniques have recently emerged as a powerful tool for learning maps between infinite-dimensional Banach spaces. Trained under appropriate constraints, they can also be effective in learning the solution operator of partial differential equations (PDEs) in an entirely self-supervised manner. In this work we analyze the training dynamics of deep operator networks (DeepONets) through the lens of Neural Tangent Kernel theory, and reveal a bias that favors the approximation of functions with larger magnitudes. To correct this bias we propose to adaptively re-weight the importance of each training example, and demonstrate how this procedure can effectively balance the magnitude of back-propagated gradients during training via gradient descent. We also propose a novel network architecture that is more resilient to vanishing gradient pathologies. Taken together, our developments provide new insights into the training of DeepONets and consistently improve their predictive accuracy by a factor of 10-50x, demonstrated in the challenging setting of learning PDE solution operators in the absence of paired input-output observations.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1998

Trellises and Trellis-Based Decoding Algorithms for Linear Block Codes

A code trellis is a graphical representation of a code, block or convolutional, in which every path represents a codeword (or a code sequence for a convolutional code). This representation makes it possible to implement Maximum Likelihood Decoding (MLD) of a code with reduced decoding complexity. The most well known trellis-based MLD algorithm is the Viterbi algorithm. The trellis representation was first introduced and used for convolutional codes [23]. This representation, together with the Viterbi decoding algorithm, has resulted in a wide range of applications of convolutional codes for error control in digital communications over the last two decades. There are two major reasons for this inactive period of research in this area. First, most coding theorists at that time believed that block codes did not have simple trellis structure like convolutional codes and maximum likelihood decoding of linear block codes using the Viterbi algorithm was practically impossible, except for very short block codes. Second, since almost all of the linear block codes are constructed algebraically or based on finite geometries, it was the belief of many coding theorists that algebraic decoding was the only way to decode these codes. These two reasons seriously hindered the development of efficient soft-decision decoding methods for linear block codes and their applications to error control in digital communications. This led to a general belief that block codes are inferior to convolutional codes and hence, that they were not useful. Chapter 2 gives a brief review of linear block codes. The goal is to provide the essential background material for the development of trellis structure and trellis-based decoding algorithms for linear block codes in the later chapters. Chapters 3 through 6 present the fundamental concepts, finite-state machine model, state space formulation, basic structural properties, state labeling, construction procedures, complexity, minimality, and sectionalization of trellises. Chapter 7 discusses trellis decomposition and subtrellises for low-weight codewords. Chapter 8 first presents well known methods for constructing long powerful codes from short component codes or component codes of smaller dimensions, and then provides methods for constructing their trellises which include Shannon and Cartesian product techniques. Chapter 9 deals with convolutional codes, puncturing, zero-tail termination and tail-biting.Chapters 10 through 13 present various trellis-based decoding algorithms, old and new. Chapter 10 first discusses the application of the well known Viterbi decoding algorithm to linear block codes, optimum sectionalization of a code trellis to minimize computation complexity, and design issues for IC (integrated circuit) implementation of a Viterbi decoder. Then it presents a new decoding algorithm for convolutional codes, named Differential Trellis Decoding (DTD) algorithm. Chapter 12 presents a suboptimum reliability-based iterative decoding algorithm with a low-weight trellis search for the most likely codeword. This decoding algorithm provides a good trade-off between error performance and decoding complexity. All the decoding algorithms presented in Chapters 10 through 12 are devised to minimize word error probability. Chapter 13 presents decoding algorithms that minimize bit error probability and provide the corresponding soft (reliability) information at the output of the decoder. Decoding algorithms presented are the MAP (maximum a posteriori probability) decoding algorithm and the Soft-Output Viterbi Algorithm (SOVA) algorithm. Finally, the minimization of bit error probability in trellis-based MLD is discussed.

Lin, Shu↗
NASA NTRS2012

Highlights of TOMS Version 9 Total Ozone Algorithm

The fundamental basis of TOMS total ozone algorithm was developed some 45 years ago by Dave and Mateer. It was designed to estimate total ozone from satellite measurements of the backscattered UV radiances at few discrete wavelengths in the Huggins ozone absorption band (310-340 nm). Over the years, as the need for higher accuracy in measuring total ozone from space has increased, several improvements to the basic algorithms have been made. They include: better correction for the effects of aerosols and clouds, an improved method to account for the variation in shape of ozone profiles with season, latitude, and total ozone, and a multi-wavelength correction for remaining profile shape errors. These improvements have made it possible to retrieve total ozone with just 3 spectral channels of moderate spectral resolution (approx. 1 nm) with accuracy comparable to state-of-the-art spectral fitting algorithms like DOAS that require high spectral resolution measurements at large number of wavelengths. One of the deficiencies of the TOMS algorithm has been that it doesn't provide an error estimate. This is a particular problem in high latitudes when the profile shape errors become significant and vary with latitude, season, total ozone, and instrument viewing geometry. The primary objective of the TOMS V9 algorithm is to account for these effects in estimating the error bars. This is done by a straightforward implementation of the Rodgers optimum estimation method using a priori ozone profiles and their error covariances matrices constructed using Aura MLS and ozonesonde data. The algorithm produces a vertical ozone profile that contains 1-2.5 pieces of information (degrees of freedom of signal) depending upon solar zenith angle (SZA). The profile is integrated to obtain the total column. We provide information that shows the altitude range in which the profile is best determined by the measurements. One can use this information in data assimilation and analysis. A side benefit of this algorithm is that it is considerably simpler than the present algorithm that uses a database of 1512 profiles to retrieve total ozone. These profiles are tedious to construct and modify. Though conceptually similar to the SBUV V8 algorithm that was developed about a decade ago, the SBUV and TOMS V9 algorithms differ in detail. The TOMS algorithm uses 3 wavelengths to retrieve the profile while the SBUV algorithm uses 6-9 wavelengths, so TOMS provides less profile information. However both algorithms have comparable total ozone information and TOMS V9 can be easily adapted to use additional wavelengths from instruments like GOME, OMI and OMPS to provide better profile information at smaller SZAs. The other significant difference between the two algorithms is that while the SBUV algorithm has been optimized for deriving monthly zonal means by making an appropriate choice of the a priori error covariance matrix, the TOMS algorithm has been optimized for tracking short-term variability using month and latitude dependent covariance matrices.

Bhartia, Pawan↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The development of the Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large complex systems engineering challenge being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams composed of multiple development disciplines. NASA also has formed an M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle. This team has developed a dedicated Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. The flexibility of VMET enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models. The intent is to validate the algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to flight software test processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test processes. Risk reduction is addressed by working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and detection and responses that can be tested in VMET and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM. The plan for VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1994

A simple suboptimal least-squares algorithm for attitude determination with multiple sensors

Three-axis attitude determination is equivalent to finding a coordinate transformation matrix which transforms a set of reference vectors fixed in inertial space to a set of measurement vectors fixed in the spacecraft. The attitude determination problem can be expressed as a constrained optimization problem. The constraint is that a coordinate transformation matrix must be proper, real, and orthogonal. A transformation matrix can be thought of as optimal in the least-squares sense if it maps the measurement vectors to the reference vectors with minimal 2-norm errors and meets the above constraint. This constrained optimization problem is known as Wahba's problem. Several algorithms which solve Wahba's problem exactly have been developed and used. These algorithms, while steadily improving, are all rather complicated. Furthermore, they involve such numerically unstable or sensitive operations as matrix determinant, matrix adjoint, and Newton-Raphson iterations. This paper describes an algorithm which minimizes Wahba's loss function, but without the constraint. When the constraint is ignored, the problem can be solved by a straightforward, numerically stable least-squares algorithm such as QR decomposition. Even though the algorithm does not explicitly take the constraint into account, it still yields a nearly orthogonal matrix for most practical cases; orthogonality only becomes corrupted when the sensor measurements are very noisy, on the same order of magnitude as the attitude rotations. The algorithm can be simplified if the attitude rotations are small enough so that the approximation sin(theta) approximately equals theta holds. We then compare the computational requirements for several well-known algorithms. For the general large-angle case, the QR least-squares algorithm is competitive with all other know algorithms and faster than most. If attitude rotations are small, the least-squares algorithm can be modified to run faster, and this modified algorithm is faster than all but a similarly specialized version of the QUEST algorithm. We also introduce a novel measurement averaging technique which reduces the n-measurement case to the two measurement case for our particular application, a star tracker and earth sensor mounted on an earth-pointed geosynchronous communications satellite. Using this technique, many n-measurement problems reduce to less than or equal to 3 measurements; this reduces the amount of required calculation without significant degradation in accuracy. Finally, we present the results of some tests which compare the least-squares algorithm with the QUEST and FOAM algorithms in the two-measurement case. For our example case, all three algorithms performed with similar accuracy.

Brozenec, Thomas F.↗