Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Plan”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2000

ISS Payload Operations: The Need for and Benefit of Responsive Planning

International Space Station (ISS) payload operations are controlled through implementation of a payload operations plan. This plan, which represents the defined approach to payload operations in general, can vary in terms of level of definition. The detailed plan provides the specific sequence and timing of each component of a payload's operations. Such an approach to planning was implemented in the Spacelab program. The responsive plan provides a flexible approach to payload operations through generalization. A responsive approach to planning was implemented in the NASA/Mir Phase 1 program, and was identified as a need during the Skylab program. The current approach to ISS payload operations planning and control tends toward detailed planning, rather than responsive planning. The use of detailed plans provides for the efficient use of limited resources onboard the ISS. It restricts flexibility in payload operations, which is inconsistent with the dynamic nature of the ISS science program, and it restricts crew desires for flexibility and autonomy. Also, detailed planning is manpower intensive. The development and implementation of a responsive plan provides for a more dynamic, more accommodating, and less manpower intensive approach to planning. The science program becomes more dynamic and responsive as the plan provides flexibility to accommodate real-time science accomplishments. Communications limitations and the crew desire for flexibility and autonomy in plan implementation are readily accommodated with responsive planning. Manpower efficiencies are accomplished through a reduction in requirements collection and coordination, plan development, and maintenance. Through examples and assessments, this paper identifies the need to transition from detailed to responsive plans for ISS payload operations. Examples depict specific characteristics of the plans. Assessments identify the following: the means by which responsive plans accommodate the dynamic nature of science programs and the crew desire for flexibility; the means by which responsive plans readily accommodate ISS communications constraints; manpower efficiencies to be achieved through use of responsive plans; and the implications of responsive planning relative to resource utilization efficiency.

Nahay, Ed↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Center Master Plan For NASA Glenn Research Center

The Center Master Plan for NASA Glenn Research Center is a comprehensive survey of NASA Glenn's current facility assets and a vision of how we see the facilities will change over the next 20 years in order to support the changing NASA Mission. This Center Master Plan is a vital management tool used by all organizations for making near term decisions and in future planning. During the summer of 2004, I worked with Joseph Morris, the Chief Architect in the Facilities Division, on beginning this Center Master Planning Process. The previous Master Plan was completed by the Center in 1985 and contained general information on the background of the facility as well as maps detailing environmental and historic records, land use, utilities, etc. The new Master Plan is required for the Center by NASA headquarters and will include similar types of information as used in the past. The new study will provide additional features including showing how individual buildings are linked to the programs and missions that they serve. The Master Plan will show practical future options for the facility s assets with a twenty year look ahead. The Plan will be electronically retrievable so that it becomes a communications tool for Center personnel. A Center Master Plan, although required, is very beneficial to NASA Glenn Research Center in aiding management with the future direction of the campus. Keeping up-to-date information and future plans readily available to all of NASA Glenn will insure that future real property development efficiently and effectively supports the missions camed out and supported by the Center. A Center Master Plan will also facilitate coordination with Center supported programs, stakeholders, and customers. In addition, it will provide a basis for cooperative planning with local and other governmental organizations and ultimately ensure that future budgets include the Center program needs described in the plan. This will ensure that development plans are safe, practical, and cost effective. To properly formulate any future plans, background information and research are required. Before bringing in a consultant to tackle the three year process anticipated to prepare a Center Master Plan, my job was to gather information on different organizations contributions to the NASA mission, their facility needs, consistent trends they observe, etc. I conducted numerous interviews with personnel such as Directorate Representatives, Division Chiefs, Branch Chiefs, System Managers and Building Managers. I documented the information I received from them for future use. I used the information to create various color-coded maps layering the different data. This was done with the ending objective being to collect the information and place it in a database that will be linked with Aperture (a computer program that generates color-coded map layers from database information) and made electronically retrievable to the Planning Consultant, NASA personnel, program stakeholders, and other governmental agencies. My goal this summer was to gather information and ideas appropriate for use in NASA Glenn Research Center s Master Plan and organize them for future application by the Planning Consultant. By the end of the summer, after completion of my goal, I will utilize my knowledge and create an array of preliminary future plans for the facility that can be passed along as a guidance tool.

Bigach, Kristin M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Adaptive Planning: Understanding Organizational Workload to Capability/ Capacity through Modeling and Simulation

In August 2003, the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) established the Adaptive Planning (AP) initiative [1] with an objective of reducing the time necessary to develop and revise Combatant Commander (COCOM) contingency plans and increase SECDEF plan visibility. In addition to reducing the traditional plan development timeline from twenty-four months to less than twelve months (with a goal of six months)[2], AP increased plan visibility to Department of Defense (DoD) leadership through In-Progress Reviews (IPRs). The IPR process, as well as the increased number of campaign and contingency plans COCOMs had to develop, increased the workload while the number of planners remained fixed. Several efforts from collaborative planning tools to streamlined processes were initiated to compensate for the increased workload enabling COCOMS to better meet shorter planning timelines. This paper examines the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP) directed contingency planning and staffing requirements assigned to a combatant commander staff through the lens of modeling and simulation. The dynamics of developing a COCOM plan are captured with an ExtendSim [3] simulation. The resulting analysis provides a quantifiable means by which to measure a combatant commander staffs workload associated with development and staffing JSCP [4] directed contingency plans with COCOM capability/capacity. Modeling and simulation bring significant opportunities in measuring the sensitivity of key variables in the assessment of workload to capability/capacity analysis. Gaining an understanding of the relationship between plan complexity, number of plans, planning processes, and number of planners with time required for plan development provides valuable information to DoD leadership. Through modeling and simulation AP leadership can gain greater insight in making key decisions on knowing where to best allocate scarce resources in an effort to meet DoD planning objectives.

Hase, Chris↗
NASA NTRS2002

Lessons Learned In Developing Multiple Distributed Planning Systems for the International Space Station

The planning processes for the International Space Station (ISS) Program are quite complex. Detailed mission planning for ISS on-orbit operations is a distributed function. Pieces of the on-orbit plan are developed by multiple planning organizations, located around the world, based on their respective expertise and responsibilities. The "pieces" are then integrated to yield the final detailed plan that will be executed onboard the ISS. Previous space programs have not distributed the planning and scheduling functions to this extent. Major ISS planning organizations are currently located in the United States (at both the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) and NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)), in Russia, in Europe, and in Japan. Software systems have been developed by each of these planning organizations to support their assigned planning and scheduling functions. Although there is some cooperative development and sharing of key software components, each planning system has been tailored to meet the unique requirements and operational environment of the facility in which it operates. However, all the systems must operate in a coordinated fashion in order to effectively and efficiently produce a single integrated plan of ISS operations, in accordance with the established planning processes. This paper addresses lessons learned during the development of these multiple distributed planning systems, from the perspective of the developer of one of the software systems. The lessons focus on the coordination required to allow the multiple systems to operate together, rather than on the problems associated with the development of any particular system. Included in the paper is a discussion of typical problems faced during the development and coordination process, such as incompatible development schedules, difficulties in defining system interfaces, technical coordination and funding for shared tools, continually evolving planning concepts/requirements, programmatic and budget issues, and external influences. Techniques that mitigated some of these problems will also be addressed, along with recommendations for any future programs involving the development of multiple planning and scheduling systems. Many of these lessons learned are not unique to the area of planning and scheduling systems, so may be applied to other distributed ground systems that must operate in concert to successfully support space mission operations.

Maxwell, Theresa G.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Lessons Learned in Developing Multiple Distributed Planning Systems for the International Space Station

The planning processes for the International Space Station (ISS) Program are quite complex. Detailed mission planning for ISS on-orbit operations is a distributed function. Pieces of the on-orbit plan are developed by multiple planning organizations, located around the world, based on their respective expertise and responsibilities. The pieces are then integrated to yield the final detailed plan that will be executed onboard the ISS. Previous space programs have not distributed the planning and scheduling functions to this extent. Major ISS planning organizations are currently located in the United States (at both the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) and NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)), in Russia, in Europe, and in Japan. Software systems have been developed by each of these planning organizations to support their assigned planning and scheduling functions. Although there is some cooperative development and sharing of key software components, each planning system has been tailored to meet the unique requirements and operational environment of the facility in which it operates. However, all the systems must operate in a coordinated fashion in order to effectively and efficiently produce a single integrated plan of ISS operations, in accordance with the established planning processes. This paper addresses lessons learned during the development of these multiple distributed planning systems, from the perspective of the developer of one of the software systems. The lessons focus on the coordination required to allow the multiple systems to operate together, rather than on the problems associated with the development of any particular system. Included in the paper is a discussion of typical problems faced during the development and coordination process, such as incompatible development schedules, difficulties in defining system interfaces, technical coordination and funding for shared tools, continually evolving planning concepts/requirements, programmatic and budget issues, and external influences. Techniques that mitigated some of these problems will also be addressed, along with recommendations for any future programs involving the development of multiple planning and scheduling systems. Many of these lessons learned are not unique to the area of planning and scheduling systems, so may be applied to other distributed ground systems that must operate in concert to successfully support space mission operations.

Maxwell, Theresa G.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Concept of Operations for OSIRIS-REx Optical Navigation Image Planning

Optical navigation (OpNav) is a critical subsystem of the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission, which operated in the vicinity of near-Earth asteroid (101955) Bennu from August 2018 through April 2021. A substantial amount of mission resources across multiple subsystems and institutions is required to ensure that the OpNav data are successfully acquired. The KinetX OpNav team, part of the Flight Dynamics System (FDS), is responsible for performing required analysis to develop the OpNav operations plans; requesting, reviewing and verifying the plans; and ultimately using the image data for critical navigation operations. The FDS team, responsible for the mission navigation, is operated by KinetX Aerospace with management and operations support from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. The Science Processing and Operations Center (SPOC), located at the University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, is responsible for generating the planning products for all science and most OpNav data. These plans are integrated into the spacecraft sequences, tested, and commanded by the Mission Support Area (MSA) at Lockheed Martin Space. To ensure mission-critical navigation image data are successfully acquired, the plan is developed through a waterfall of planning cycles over the course of 3 months prior to onboard plan execution. During the initial strategic planning for a mission phase, detailed analysis is performed by the OpNav team to conceptualize the concept of operations (ConOps) for image data collection. This phase OpNav Narrative is included along with other strategic planning documents for the key ground segment stakeholders to review and provide feedback. The detailed OpNav plans get defined in the tactical planning cycle, which spans 8 to 3 weeks before the week-long integrated sequence is executed on-board the spacecraft. During the tactical cycle, the initial OpNav Request is submitted along with the science requests, kicking off development of the science and OpNav plans. Once the initial plan is drafted, interfaces are exercised so that the plan can be reviewed and iterated, if necessary. A rigorous schedule is followed by the planning teams during the implementation cycle, spanning the last 18 days before uplink, to ensure all the necessary integration, testing, and reviewing can occur on time. The development of the OpNav planning ConOps, including responsibilities, interfaces, timelines, and procedures, took extensive collaboration across mission elements and institutions. The process was robust throughout the 137 weeks of continuous Optical Navigation Operations at Bennu, which concluded on April 9th, 2021.

Coralie D. Adam↗
NASA NTRS2010

Collective Intelligence and Three Aspects of Planning in Organizations: A NASA Example

For many complex sociotechnical systems, planning seems to require explicit coordination; certainly, in executing a plan the activities of different actors must be tightly coupled. However, distributing the needed planning information can be very burdensome and error prone, because different groups need different collections of information, updated or kept current on different time cycles. Further, the information needed to form successful plans is often highly distributed, and while feedback about the success of prior plans may exist, it may not be available to those in a position of using this to improve plans or to detect and resolve other problems in the system (Weick, 1995). Tools to support various aspects of planning have been developed, and can provide a huge benefit to the individuals working on that aspect. To be tractable, most solutions address a quite bounded slice of work, isolating it from the larger context. Prospective planning takes place over multiple, nested cycles of decision making. This builds a plan that specifies activities of different granularity. "Subplans" may specify multiple parallel activities by different groups and individuals, as well as sequential, nested actions by a single actor. Planning produces valuable, sharable, external, representations: in addition to prospective use, plans support retrospective assessment and also action in the present. Viewing planning in a larger context - both temporal and organizational -- enables noticing what one does not know and generating more systemic and effective solutions. Viewing a problem as one of collective intelligence invites thinking about the larger organizational context. Many approaches to supporting collective intelligence do not support execution of highly contingent actions, distributed across many players, and hence provide incomplete support for planning. However, CI technology maybe helpful in managing the processes of gathering information for decision making in planning and of distributing plan information to various actors, needed on various time cycles.

Billman, Dorrit↗
NASA NTRS2022

Balancing Predictive and Reactive Science Planning for Mars 2020 Perseverance

The design of the science planning process for a space science mission needs to find a balance between operational and resource constraints and scientific decision-making. Science planning has previously been characterized as either predictive or reactive. Predictive science planning is needed when constraints drive science activities to be planned far in advance. For example, a combination of long one-way light time plus high-stakes science decisions drove the Cassini-Huygens mission to Saturn to have an extremely predictive planning process. On the other extreme, reactive science planning is needed when constraints drive science activities to be planned based on the results of the previous plan. For example, the Mars Exploration Rover mission interacted with the surface of Mars, and so the planning team needed to know the state of the rover at the end of each planning cycle before starting the next cycle. Operational and resource constraints that require management on intermediate timescales has led to the development of a science planning process between these two extremes. For example, the Mars Science Laboratory is a technically complex rover and has a parallel predictive process that allows the operations team to manage engineering constraints several days in advance while maintaining the reactive tactical planning process similar to that of MER. The Mars 2020 Perseverance rover is a technically complex rover in the MSL style, but has an added layer of science complexity: it is tasked with collecting a returnable cache of scientifically valuable samples of Mars within prime mission. Thus, the science planning process also needs to accommodate high-stakes longer-term science decisions in the style of Cassini. In order to balance the push-pull of these constraints, we have developed a science campaign-focused operational paradigm for Mars 2020 Perseverance that allows for both predictive planning to accommodate technological complexity and high-stakes science decisions as well as reactive planning to accommodate the realities of interacting with the martian surface. This paradigm influenced the design of operational processes and operational tools.

Spanovich, Nicole↗
NASA NTRS2018

Evaluation of Crew-Centric Onboard Mission Operations Planning and Execution Tool: Year 2

Currently, mission planning for the International Space Station (ISS) is largely affected by ground operators in mission control. The task of creating a week-long mission plan for ISS crew takes dozens of people multiple days to complete, and is often created far in advance of its execution. As such, re-planning or adapting to changing real-time constraints or emergent issues is similarly taxing. As we design for future mission operations concepts to other planets or areas with limited connectivity to Earth, more of these ground-based tasks will need to be handled autonomously by the crew onboard.There is a need for a highly usable (including low training time) tool that enables efficient self-scheduling and execution within a single package. The ISS Program has identified Playbook as a potential option. It already has high crew acceptance as a plan viewer from previous analogs and can now support a crew self-scheduling assessment on ISS or on another mission. The goals of this work, a collaboration between the Human Research Program and the ISS Program, are to inform the design of systems for more autonomous crew operations and provide a platform for research on crew autonomy for future deep space missions. Our second year of the research effort have included new insights on the crew self-scheduling sessions performed by the crew through use on the HERA (Human Exploration Research Analog) and NEEMO (NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations) analogs. Use on the NEEMO analog involved two self-scheduling strategies where the crew planned and executed two days of EVAs (Extra-Vehicular Activities). On HERA year two represented the first HERA campaign where we were able to perform research tasks. This involved selected flexible activities that the crew could schedule, mock timelines where the crew completed more complex planning exercises, usability evaluation of the crew self-scheduling features, and more insights into the limit of plan complexity that the crew could effectively self-schedule. In parallel we have added in new features and functionality in the Playbook tool based off of our insights from crew self-scheduling in the NASA analogs. In particular this year we have added in the ability for the crew to add, edit, and remove their own activities in the Playbook tool, expanding the type of planning and re-planning possible in the tool and opening up the ability for more free form plan creation. The ability to group and manipulate groups of activities from the plan task list was also added, allowing crew members to add predefined sets of activities onto their mission timeline. In addition we also added a way for crew members to roll back changes in their plan, in order to allow an undo like capability. These features expand and complement the initial self-scheduling features added in year one with the goal of making crew autonomous planning more efficient. As part of this work we have also finished developing the first version of our Playbook Data Analysis Tool, a research tool built to interpret and analyze the unobtrusively collected data obtained during the NASA analog missions through Playbook. This data which includes user click interaction as well as plan change information, through the Playbook Data Analysis Tool, allows us to playback this information as if a video camera was mounted over the crewmember's tablet. While the primary purpose of this tool is to allow usability analysis of crew self-scheduling sessions used on the NASA analog, since the data collected is structured, the tool can automatically derive metrics that would be traditionally tedious to achieve without manual analysis of video playback. We will demonstrate and discuss the ability for future derived metrics to be added to the tool. In addition to the current data and results gathered in year two we will also discuss the preparation and goals of our International Space Station (ISS) onboard technology demonstration with Playbook. This technology demonstration will be preformed as part of the CAST payload starting in late 2016.

onboard planning↗
NASA NTRS1987

Maintaining consistency between planning hierarchies: Techniques and applications

In many planning and scheduling environments, it is desirable to be able to view and manipulate plans at different levels of abstraction, allowing the users the option of viewing and manipulating either a very detailed representation of the plan or a high-level more abstract version of the plan. Generating a detailed plan from a more abstract plan requires domain-specific planning/scheduling knowledge; the reverse process of generating a high-level plan from a detailed plan Reverse Plan Maintenance, or RPM) requires having the system remember the actions it took based on its domain-specific knowledge and its reasons for taking those actions. This reverse plan maintenance process is described as implemented in a specific planning and scheduling tool, The Mission Operations Planning Assistant (MOPA), as well as the applications of RPM to other planning and scheduling problems; emphasizing the knowledge that is needed to maintain the correspondence between the different hierarchical planning levels.

Zoch, David R.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Demonstration of a Spoken Dialogue Interface for Planning Activities of a Semi-autonomous Robot

Planning and scheduling in the face of uncertainty and change pushes the capabilities of both planning and dialogue technologies by requiring complex negotiation to arrive at a workable plan. Planning for use of semi-autonomous robots involves negotiation among multiple participants with competing scientific and engineering goals to co-construct a complex plan. In NASA applications this plan construction is done under severe time pressure so having a dialogue interface to the plan construction tools can aid rapid completion of the process. But, this will put significant demands on spoken dialogue technology, particularly in the areas of dialogue management and generation. The dialogue interface will need to be able to handle the complex dialogue strategies that occur in negotiation dialogues, including hypotheticals and revisions, and the generation component will require an ability to summarize complex plans. This demonstration will describe a work in progress towards building a spoken dialogue interface to the EUROPA planner for the purposes of planning and scheduling the activities of a semi-autonomous robot. A prototype interface has been built for planning the schedule of the Personal Satellite Assistant (PSA), a mobile robot designed for micro-gravity environments that is intended for use on the Space Shuttle and International Space Station. The spoken dialogue interface gives the user the capability to ask for a description of the plan, ask specific questions about the plan, and update or modify the plan. We anticipate that a spoken dialogue interface to the planner will provide a natural augmentation or alternative to the visualization interface, in situations in which the user needs very targeted information about the plan, in situations where natural language can express complex ideas more concisely than GUI actions, or in situations in which a graphical user interface is not appropriate.

Dowding, John↗
NASA NTRS2006

Using Correlation to Compute Better Probability Estimates in Plan Graphs

Plan graphs are commonly used in planning to help compute heuristic "distance" estimates between states and goals. A few authors have also attempted to use plan graphs in probabilistic planning to compute estimates of the probability that propositions can be achieved and actions can be performed. This is done by propagating probability information forward through the plan graph from the initial conditions through each possible action to the action effects, and hence to the propositions at the next layer of the plan graph. The problem with these calculations is that they make very strong independence assumptions - in particular, they usually assume that the preconditions for each action are independent of each other. This can lead to gross overestimates in probability when the plans for those preconditions interfere with each other. It can also lead to gross underestimates of probability when there is synergy between the plans for two or more preconditions. In this paper we introduce a notion of the binary correlation between two propositions and actions within a plan graph, show how to propagate this information within a plan graph, and show how this improves probability estimates for planning. This notion of correlation can be thought of as a continuous generalization of the notion of mutual exclusion (mutex) often used in plan graphs. At one extreme (correlation=0) two propositions or actions are completely mutex. With correlation = 1, two propositions or actions are independent, and with correlation > 1, two propositions or actions are synergistic. Intermediate values can and do occur indicating different degrees to which propositions and action interfere or are synergistic. We compare this approach with another recent approach by Bryce that computes probability estimates using Monte Carlo simulation of possible worlds in plan graphs.

Bryce, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS1994

Galileo mission planning for Low Gain Antenna based operations

The Galileo mission operations concept is undergoing substantial redesign, necessitated by the deployment failure of the High Gain Antenna, while the spacecraft is on its way to Jupiter. The new design applies state-of-the-art technology and processes to increase the telemetry rate available through the Low Gain Antenna and to increase the information density of the telemetry. This paper describes the mission planning process being developed as part of this redesign. Principal topics include a brief description of the new mission concept and anticipated science return (these have been covered more extensively in earlier papers), identification of key drivers on the mission planning process, a description of the process and its implementation schedule, a discussion of the application of automated mission planning tool to the process, and a status report on mission planning work to date. Galileo enhancements include extensive reprogramming of on-board computers and substantial hard ware and software upgrades for the Deep Space Network (DSN). The principal mode of operation will be onboard recording of science data followed by extended playback periods. A variety of techniques will be used to compress and edit the data both before recording and during playback. A highly-compressed real-time science data stream will also be important. The telemetry rate will be increased using advanced coding techniques and advanced receivers. Galileo mission planning for orbital operations now involves partitioning of several scarce resources. Particularly difficult are division of the telemetry among the many users (eleven instruments, radio science, engineering monitoring, and navigation) and allocation of space on the tape recorder at each of the ten satellite encounters. The planning process is complicated by uncertainty in forecast performance of the DSN modifications and the non-deterministic nature of the new data compression schemes. Key mission planning steps include quantifying resource or capabilities to be allocated, prioritizing science observations and estimating resource needs for each, working inter-and intra-orbit trades of these resources among the Project elements, and planning real-time science activity. The first major mission planning activity, a high level, orbit-by-orbit allocation of resources among science objectives, has already been completed; and results are illustrated in the paper. To make efficient use of limited resources, Galileo mission planning will rely on automated mission planning tools capable of dealing with interactions among time-varying downlink capability, real-time science and engineering data transmission, and playback of recorded data. A new generic mission planning tool is being adapted for this purpose.

Gershman, R.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Robustness via Run-Time Adaptation of Contingent Plans

In this paper, we discuss our approach to making the behavior of planetary rovers more robust for the purpose of increased productivity. Due to the inherent uncertainty in rover exploration, the traditional approach to rover control is conservative, limiting the autonomous operation of the rover and sacrificing performance for safety. Our objective is to increase the science productivity possible within a single uplink by allowing the rover's behavior to be specified with flexible, contingent plans and by employing dynamic plan adaptation during execution. We have deployed a system exhibiting flexible, contingent execution; this paper concentrates on our ongoing efforts on plan adaptation, Plans can be revised in two ways: plan steps may be deleted, with execution continuing with the plan suffix; and the current plan may be merged with an "alternate plan" from an on-board library. The plan revision action is chosen to maximize the expected utility of the plan. Plan merging and action deletion constitute a more conservative general-purpose planning system; in return, our approach is more efficient and more easily verified, two important criteria for deployed rovers.

Bresina, John L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Identifying Executable Plans

Generating plans for execution imposes a different set of requirements on the planning process than those imposed by planning alone. In highly unpredictable execution environments, a fully-grounded plan may become inconsistent frequently when the world fails to behave as expected. Intelligent execution permits making decisions when the most up-to-date information is available, ensuring fewer failures. Planning should acknowledge the capabilities of the execution system, both to ensure robust execution in the face of uncertainty, which also relieves the planner of the burden of making premature commitments. We present Plan Identification Functions (PIFs), which formalize what it means for a plan to be executable, md are used in conjunction with a complete model of system behavior to halt the planning process when an executable plan is found. We describe the implementation of plan identification functions for a temporal, constraint-based planner. This particular implementation allows the description of many different plan identification functions. characteristics crf the ~xec~~tieonfvii r~nm-enft,h e best plan to hand to the execution system will contain more or less commitment and information.

Bedrax-Weiss, Tania↗
NASA NTRS2012

Development of Waypoint Planning Tool in Response to NASA Field Campaign Challenges

Airborne real time observations are a major component of NASA's Earth Science research and satellite ground validation studies. For mission scientists, planning a research aircraft mission within the context of meeting the science objectives is a complex task because it requires real time situational awareness of the weather conditions that affect the aircraft track. Multiple aircrafts are often involved in NASA field campaigns. The coordination of the aircrafts with satellite overpasses, other airplanes and the constantly evolving, dynamic weather conditions often determines the success of the campaign. A flight planning tool is needed to provide situational awareness information to the mission scientists, and help them plan and modify the flight tracks. Scientists at the University of Alabama-Huntsville and the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center developed the Waypoint Planning Tool, an interactive software tool that enables scientists to develop their own flight plans (also known as waypoints) with point -and-click mouse capabilities on a digital map filled with real time raster and vector data. The development of this Waypoint Planning Tool demonstrates the significance of mission support in responding to the challenges presented during NASA field campaigns. Analysis during and after each campaign helped identify both issues and new requirements, and initiated the next wave of development. Currently the Waypoint Planning Tool has gone through three rounds of development and analysis processes. The development of this waypoint tool is directly affected by the technology advances on GIS/Mapping technologies. From the standalone Google Earth application and simple KML functionalities, to Google Earth Plugin and Java Web Start/Applet on web platform, and to the rising open source GIS tools with new JavaScript frameworks, the Waypoint Planning Tool has entered its third phase of technology advancement. The newly innovated, cross ]platform, modular designed JavaScript ]controlled Way Point Tool is planned to be integrated with NASA Airborne Science Mission Tool Suite. Adapting new technologies for the Waypoint Planning Tool ensures its success in helping scientists reach their mission objectives. This presentation will discuss the development processes of the Waypoint Planning Tool in responding to field campaign challenges, identify new information technologies, and describe the capabilities and features of the Waypoint Planning Tool with the real time aspect, interactive nature, and the resultant benefits to the airborne science community.

He, Matt↗
NASA NTRS1991

Explanation-based generalization of partially ordered plans

Most previous work in analytic generalization of plans dealt with totally ordered plans. These methods cannot be directly applied to generalizing partially ordered plans, since they do not capture all interactions among plan operators for all total orders of such plans. We introduce a new method for generalizing partially ordered plans. This method is based on providing explanation-based generalization (EBG) with explanations which systematically capture the interactions among plan operators for all the total orders of a partially-ordered plan. The explanations are based on the Modal Truth Criterion which states the necessary and sufficient conditions for ensuring the truth of a proposition at any point in a plan, for a class of partially ordered plans. The generalizations obtained by this method guarantee successful and interaction-free execution of any total order of the generalized plan. In addition, the systematic derivation of the generalization algorithms from the Modal Truth Criterion obviates the need for carrying out a separate formal proof of correctness of the EBG algorithms.

Kambhampati, Subbarao↗
NASA NTRS1994

Abstraction Planning in Real Time

When a planning agent works in a complex, real-world domain, it is unable to plan for and store all possible contingencies and problem situations ahead of time. The agent needs to be able to fall back on an ability to construct plans at run time under time constraints. This thesis presents a method for planning at run time that incrementally builds up plans at multiple levels of abstraction. The plans are continually updated by information from the world, allowing the planner to adjust its plan to a changing world during the planning process. All the information is represented over intervals of time, allowing the planner to reason about durations, deadlines, and delays within its plan. In addition to the method, the thesis presents a formal model of the planning process and uses the model to investigate planning strategies. The method has been implemented, and experiments have been run to validate the overall approach and the theoretical model.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE↗