Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “TRUST”

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 901 records · Page 50
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

AAM NC ATI TechTalk - Aerograph Architecture v1

Aerograph is NASA’s data management system for Advanced Air Mobility. Its mission is to support AAM research by providing a reliable and secure system that collects, stores, protects, and shares AAM data. Its vision is to provide a system that AAM research scientists, aerospace engineers, data scientists, and analysts trust for obtaining NC data and performing key analyses. The types of data Aerograph manages involves data related to flight test events, including: Aircraft Performance and Characterization (e.g., position reports) Airspace (e.g., operation intent, waypoints, and constraints) Environment (e.g., surface and wind weather) Infrastructure (e.g., surveillance coverage) Derivative Analytical Artifacts (e.g., glide path performance chart, 3D position chart, Integrated Data Product)

Aerograph↗
NASA NTRS2022

Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, and Psychosocial Adaptions within a Team

The Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team (the Team Risk) is primarily performance-focused, with a secondary emphasis on behavioral health outcomes resulting from team performance and interpersonal interactions. Monitoring tools, measures, and countermeasures are aimed at enhancing team processes and team composition configurations to optimize team performance and functioning. Long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will include major challenges that could affect team performance, including social isolation, physical confinement, a small and diverse crew, communication delays between crew and ground, limited or no crew rotation or evacuation options, limited or no resupply, and a high-consequence environment. Each of these conditions will affect the crew’s coordination, cooperation, psychological well-being, and performance. Although the International Space Station (ISS) remains important for studies that require spaceflight testing and validation, the current conditions on the ISS do not adequately mimic the exploration environment that is required for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) teams research, and thus access to terrestrial or ground-based analogs of LDEM conditions is paramount. The emphasis on analogs for research is reflected in this updated evidence review of the Team Risk, and includes data from studies conducted at isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments (e.g., Antarctic stations), and from several mission simulation analogs such as the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) (HERA Experiment Information Package, 2014), also known as isolated, confined, controlled (ICC) environments. These studies have characterized many team factors regarding LDEMs, and the Team Risk has now matured from risk characterization to focusing more on countermeasure development. Because spaceflight evidence for team-level research is lacking, no reliable data is available to quantify the impact of team-level variables on individual and team-level outcomes during spaceflight missions. Until recently, no systematic attempt had been undertaken to measure the performance effects of team cohesion, team composition, team training, or team-related psychosocial adaptation during spaceflight. The Team Risk is a relatively young research area for NASA, with substantial growth only since the 2000s, and with limited access to spaceflight performance data. As a result, spaceflight evidence is lacking to identify specifically what team composition, level of training, amount of cohesion, or quality of psychosocial adaptation is necessary to reduce the risk of performance errors in space. However, astronaut journals and interviews and reports from spaceflight subject matter experts (SMEs) provide testimonies that team performance during spaceflight is important for mission success and to maintain crew health. Team spaceflight data is now being collected as part of the Spaceflight Standard Measures task (Clement, 2021)—a set of core measurements related to many human spaceflight risks that are collected from astronauts before, during, and after long-duration missions. The team-related standard measures focus on team cohesion, team performance, group living, team climate, and team processes. Collection of standard measures data is ongoing and published data is not yet available. Finally, although spaceflight evidence is lacking, evidence gleaned from ground studies and spaceflight analog studies will help close the gaps outlined in the Team Risk. Ground-based studies provide quantitative evidence for team functioning in ICE environments. Academic research on teams has produced dozens of meta-analyses that can be used to understand the general relationships among team inputs (e.g., team member characteristics and skills, job context), team processes, and emergent states (e.g., coordination, communication, cooperation, cohesion, trust, shared cognition), and team outcomes (e.g., effectiveness, errors, adaptation). Teams are complex, incorporating individual characteristics of team members, but also existing at a level that is greater than the sum of its parts. Therefore, the Team Risk must be integrated with other individual-focused NASA Human Research Program (HRP) risks, including Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Sleep, and Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and emerging research indicates more integration may needed between the Team Risk and the physiologically oriented risks. Much of this integration occurs through the Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB). A lack of team functioning may be a stressor in some circumstances, but the team often acts as a countermeasure. For example, support for team leaders and teammates can facilitate individual functioning and encourage psychological and physically healthy behaviors and attitudes. However, more research is needed regarding teams during LDEMs and the remaining gaps in the research are described in the current report.

Lauren Blackwell Landon↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lower Illinois River Valley Ecological Forecasting: Inundation Mapping of the Lower Illinois River Valley Using Synthetic Aperture Radar and Optical Satellite Imagery for Wetland Conservation and Restoration Prioritization Efforts

The Lower Illinois River Valley (LIRV) is home to some of the richest agricultural lands in the United States and its wetlands provide key ecosystem services like clean water and flood reduction. It has also experienced extensive degradation due to development and urban pollution. The Great Rivers Land Trust (GRLT), the National Great Rivers Research & Education Center, Principia College, and the American Geophysical Union’s (AGU) Thriving Earth Exchange sought to incorporate inundation and surface water extent layers into their geodatabases to more accurately identify priority areas for wetland restoration. This project aimed to determine the feasibility of detecting inundation extent and duration along the valley using remotely sensed data. The team used Sentinel-1 C-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data to classify open water and inundated vegetation within the study site. The open water classification was compared to Dynamic Surface Water Extent (DSWE) derived from Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager. The team successfully created layers of inundation minimum and maximum extent, as well as inundation duration across the study area for 2019 and 2020. The open water classification resulted in an overall accuracy of 86% when validated against DSWE classifications. These analyses will help end users to identify high priority areas along the LIRV best suited for land conversion projects in the future.

Vanessa Machuca↗
NASA NTRS2023

Forward for the new edition of: “What Every Engineer Should Know About Risk Engineering and Management"

In aerospace and engineering in general, the major metrics are capability, cost, and safety/risk. With the increasingly rapid emergence and utilization of new technologies and systems of increasing complexity, ensuring safety becomes more difficult. The technology and practice/applications of safety/risk technologies require updating in concert with capability and systems technology changes. Hence the new, updated edition of this risk engineering book. Major changes in technology and applications, now and going forward, increasingly involve artificial intelligence (AI)/autonomy and complex systems, which are rapidly developing and moving targets when it comes to risk/safety analysis. These introduce both new risks and safety issues, and they alter more usual ones. The current reality is that often the best AI is when it is “Black Boxed”, developed “independently”, without detailed human understanding of how and by what processes decisions and results are produced. There are ongoing efforts to make the AI processes more understandable by humans, with results to be determined. Also, trusted and true autonomy is free of human intervention, which would require machines to ideate to solve in real time issues that arise due to unknown unknowns and even known unknowns. Machines using generative adversarial network (GANs) and other approaches are beginning to ideate. Overall, the capabilities and practice of AI/autonomy utilization is a work in progress with the rate of progress substantial and the impacts upon system risk/safety major.

Dennis M. Bushnell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Decision Support Tool for Risk Assessment & Maneuver Planning in Collision Avoidance

As the quantity of orbital debris continues to grow, so too does the rate of conjunction messages that suggest possible collisions between high value payloads and debris. The abundance of these conjunction messages, and eventual misses, has led to a culture of ignored alerts, and an increase in satellite operation costs as a result of the frequent need to plan resources for maneuver planning and execution. The loss of “trust” in conjunction alerts is due to the poorly characterized evolution in probability of collision (Pc) as time approaches the time of closest approach (TCA) between two objects, as well as the interpretation of Pc in the context of maneuver planning. To address these problems, and in collaboration with the NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) program, the Industrial Sciences Group has developed a novel Maneuver Decision Support System (MDSS) to assist satellite operations in conjunction assessment and Maneuver planning. It provides a meaningful and intuitive Urgency metric for actionable maneuver decisions, based on the physical dynamics of conjunctions. It is based on a forecast of the evolution of Pc over time and represents an advance over current methods that are in use for satellite conjunction monitoring and planning. The result is to give satellite operators a validated decision support systems to plan for maneuver execution or mitigation or monitoring up to 3 days before TCA.

Decision Support Tool↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Flight Replanning Tool for Terminal Area Urban Air Mobility Operations

In this presentation we describe and evaluate a flight replanning tool, called the trial planner, for terminal area air transport applications. The trial planner employs predefined airspace structures to generate rerouting options between vertiports. In a simplified definition, vertiports are facilities that provide services for managing the take-off and landing of autonomous or manned electric vertical take-off or landing (eVTOL) aircraft. The airspace structures involved in our test cases are arrival routes that consist of predefined entry points to which a transitional path is computed dynamically from the current position of the aircraft. Rerouting options include the transitional path and approach segment along the arrival route; these rerouting options are not vetted for potential conflicts with other operations until a human operator commits to a choice and forwards the flight plan modification for approval from an automated airspace management service. A selected rerouting option is executed by loading a flight plan file to the aircraft ground control station. We conducted a qualitative evaluation of the trial planner using ratings provided by flight crews and air transportation human factors experts with relevant experience from air traffic control. Evaluation criteria included trust in the route recommendations and adequate explanation for the route options. We detail the logic and implementation of the trial planner, as well as report the results of the evaluation of the implementation herein.

Trial planning↗
NASA NTRS2022

Lower Illinois River Valley Ecological Forecasting: Inundation Mapping of the Lower Illinois River Valley Using Synthetic Aperture Radar and Optical Satellite Imagery for Wetland Conservation and Restoration Prioritization Efforts

The Lower Illinois River Valley (LIRV) is home to some of the richest agricultural lands in the United States and its wetlands provide key ecosystem services like clean water and flood reduction. It has also experienced extensive degradation due to development and urban pollution. The Great Rivers Land Trust (GRLT), the National Great Rivers Research & Education Center, Principia College, and the American Geophysical Union’s (AGU) Thriving Earth Exchange sought to incorporate inundation and surface water extent layers into their geodatabases to more accurately identify priority areas for wetland restoration. This project aimed to determine the feasibility of detecting inundation extent and duration along the valley using remotely sensed data. We used Sentinel-1 C-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data to classify open water and inundated vegetation within the study site. The open water classification was compared to Dynamic Surface Water Extent(DSWE) derived from Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager. We successfully created layers of inundation minimum and maximum extent, as well as inundation duration across the study area for 2019 and 2020. The open water classification resulted in an overall accuracy of 86% when validated against DSWE classifications. These analyses will help end users to identify high priority areas along the LIRV best suited for land conversion projects in the future.

Vanessa Machuca↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Safety Culture at the World’s Premier Multi-User Spaceport

NASA’s Agency-wide Safety Culture is implemented at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) using a unique strategy due an unparalleled approach in making human spaceflight history. Kennedy Space Center, the world’s premier multi-user spaceport, enables U.S. government and commercial space access, while providing the world a resource to allow the exploration of and the ability to work in space. A consistently healthy safety culture at KSC is imperative for mission success: desired achievements, protection of space flight hardware, and ultimately, the preservation of human life requires the support of a healthy safety culture. Emphasis on the NASA Agency-wide development of Safety Culture began with the conception of the NASA Agency Safety Culture Working Group. After the devastating loss of life and mission of the Space Shuttle Colombia, a broken safety culture was identified as an organizational cause by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report. Thus, the Agency Safety Culture Working Group was developed in 2009 to assess the status of the Agency’s Safety Culture, while addressing safety culture concerns at the NASA Center-level. A Five-factor model was developed to serve as the guiding principles for Safety Culture: 1) Reporting Culture, 2) Just Culture, 3) Flexible Culture, 4) Learning Culture, and 5) Engaged Culture. These five factors are included in the NASA Safety Culture logo, which was intentionally designed as a DNA double helix to prompt the permeation of safety into day-to-day work. KSC specifically implements the NASA Agency-wide Safety Culture principles in a tailored approach that is relevant to the diversity of work being performed. An emphasis is placed on the implementation to include safety at home, not exclusively at work. This emphasis is a KSC-specific element that has been intentionally added to promote a closed loop Safety Culture. To advertise the safety culture, various safety and health events are held throughout the calendar year, providing innovative speakers and engaging activities, while also promoting a wide range of curated safety initiatives. Development and continuous improvement of the KSC safety tracking database, allows for advanced tracking-to-closure, along with providing data sets used to identify areas of emphasis. Other safety initiatives rely solely on employee participation, such as the photo challenges; participants are encouraged to identify and capture themselves, coworkers, or family members participating in safe or healthy activities to share with others within the Center and at Agency levels. Fabrication of exclusive videos and graphics are utilized to advertise and inform employee of safety initiatives, upcoming safety events, and general dispersion of safety information. In addition, an anonymous Agency-wide Safety Culture Survey is advertised, administered, and analyzed at Kennedy Space Center, with the purpose of receiving basic feedback on Safety Culture perceptions to help prevent future incidents from occurring. Through these briefly identified means, and many other forms of employee engagement, Kennedy Space Center aims to maintain safety in the forefront, while creating an environment where everyone trusts that safety is a priority.

Larrin E. Moody↗
NASA NTRS2022

Kamodo’s Model-Agnostic Satellite Flythrough: Lowering the Utilization Barrier for Heliophysics Model Outputs

Heliophysics model outputs are increasingly accessible, but typically are not usable by the majority of the community unless directly collaborating with the relevant model developers. Prohibitive factors include complex file output formats, cryptic metadata, unspecified and often customized coordinate systems, and non-linear coordinate grids. Some pockets of progress exist, giving interfaces to various simulation outputs, but only for a small set of outputs and typically not with open-source, freely available packages. Additionally, the increasing array of tools built upon these sporadic interfaces are typically model-specific. We present Kamodo’s model-agnostic satellite flythrough capabilities as the solution to the utilization barrier for heliophysics model outputs. Developed at the Community Coordinated Modeling Center, these flythrough capabilities are built in Python upon a network of model-agnostic interfaces developed in collaboration with model developers, providing interpolation results the community can trust. Kamodo’s flythrough capabilities present the user with a growing variety of flythrough tools based upon a rapidly expanding library of heliophysics model outputs in several domains, currently including a variety of Ionosphere-Thermosphere-Mesosphere and global magnetosphere model outputs. Each capability is designed to be easily accessible via simplistic model-agnostic syntax, with the entire package freely available in the cloud on Github. Here, we describe the tools developed, include several sample applications for common science questions, demonstrate interoperability with selected packages, and summarize ongoing developments.

Software↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Earth Observations and the NASA Earth Science Disasters Program: Providing Data, Services and Science Expertise to Inform End User Decision-Making Throughout the Disaster Management Cycle

Program Goals: - Harness NASA Capabilities for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and resilience - Engage stakeholders in the use of Earth Observations (EO) throughout the disaster lifecycle - Demonstrate the value and impact of EO to support decision making and actions - Grow as a trusted source for delivering useful results

Ronan Lucey↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Safety, Reliability, and Mission Assurance Digital Future

The evolution from “document-centric” to “data-centric” and “model-centric” information leveraging structured data and model-based approaches is at the heart of digital engineering transformational efforts underway across industry and government. It is these approaches that pave the way for data lakes, Authoritative Sources of Truth (ASOTs), and systems- of-systems interoperability and the corresponding transformational benefits thereof. Such benefits include increased data availability, data access equity, data traceability, real-time analytics, batch analytics, and (most importantly) acceleration of the time-to-value and time-to-insights associated with engineering products and analyses. The longer-term benefits of reusability, customization and traceability are even more promising. For Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA), and Mission Success (SMS) activities; realization of such benefits is essential to provide engineers and analysts alike vital information when needed to support critical decision making throughout the entire life cycle. The SMA community often operate in parallel with engineering activities, for which information exchange with relevant context is paramount. Far too often, such information lags key decision points and/or is absent of the robust, integrated, knowledge needed, given inherent barriers associated with traditional document-centric means to data sharing, analysis, and reporting. This paper provides an overview of how NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) is evolving its policies, standards, guidance, and training to transform to eliminate such barriers, thus realizing the benefits emerging in this new digital era. A roadmap for achieving this digital future is presented along with key building blocks involving use and implementation of concepts such as: Objectives-Hierarchies, Objective-Driven Requirements, Accepted Standards, Safety and Assurance Cases, data digitization (i.e., ontologies, structured data, and model-centric data), FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, & Reusable) and/or FAIRUST (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable, Understandable, Secure, and Trusted) principles [1]. This paper also describes how OSMA, leveraging the Agency’s overall commitment to Digital Transformation (DT), is using the power of Policy, “Digital” Domain representation, Product Evolution, and Community Outreach and Engagement as part of a strategic vision and roadmap to evolve and transform its SMA organizations to become better able to serve its stakeholders and customers. Future publications will elaborate on these building blocks and deeper concepts.

Authoritative Source of Truth (ASOT),↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems through Ground Control Software

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as a way to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities [1]. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for the specific mission and operating environment. Such justifications for systems with autonomous capabilities are often based on various probabilistic quantifications [2]. Due to the dynamic nature of the environmental conditions in which these systems operate, as well as the changing nature of the autonomous systems themselves, these probabilistic quantifications cannot be simply estimated once during design time. Rather, they need to be continually evaluated during systems operations to ensure that the assurance case justifications are valid. We refer to the assurance case that combines both the static and dynamic elements as a Dynamic Assurance Case (DAC). Such complex systems with autonomous capabilities are often deployed with a Ground Control Software (GCS) component to enable remote operation. Whether the system is composed of a single unit or a fleet of units, deployed distributed or in remote environments, GCS acts as a window into the behavior of the deployed system. It receives telemetry from the system, issues commands to the system and provides various functionalities to visualize the system performance. We propose a dynamic assurance framework where the GCS acts as a relay between the autonomous system and its DAC. GCS can be used to measure both unit-specific as well as system-wide probabilistic quantifications using the incoming telemetry. We embed these quantifications throughout the DAC as variables that can be updated by external sources. We use the GCS to periodically update these variables, which allows us to continually evaluate the formally defined assurance case justifications. We demonstrate our dynamic assurance framework in the NASA Ames project Troupe1 that aims at developing a fleet of rovers capable of au- tonomously mapping their environment. The rovers work cooperatively, each collecting data for different parts of the environment. Each rover runs an identical core Flight System (cFS) [4] application. Troupe1 uses OpenC3 Cosmos [5] as the ground system, and AdvoCATE [3] to capture the system DAC. We show how we can measure both rover-specific and system-wide quantifications in Cosmos using its Ruby scripting editor and pass them into the DAC modelled in AdvoCATE. Then, we show how these incoming variables can be embedded in different parts of the DAC and how effects of their updates can be observed

Irfan Sljivo↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing JEDI into NASA GMAO’s Real Time Production Suite

NASA’s Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO) has prepared their first production system involving the Joint Effort for Data assimilation Integration (JEDI) framework. In this system the central analysis, that drives the deterministic forecast, will be provided using JEDI. This talk outlines the phased approach to implementing JEDI into production that GMAO has designed, and how this approach will allow for a careful analysis of the system against the existing data assimilation framework (GSI). In the first phase of implementation the existing data assimilation system will perform certain actions that are still under development in JEDI. These include thinning the observations and producing satellite bias correction coefficients. JEDI is hooked up to the existing workflow so a single line switch can activate whether the existing or JEDI-based analysis is cycled. Outside of the monumental effort to construct JEDI that is ongoing at the Joint Center for Satellite Data Assimilation (JCSDA), GMAO have undertaken two areas of considerable effort. The talk will describe these efforts and highlight the main challenges that have been encountered. The first area of work is to implement the background error model from the existing data assimilation system into JEDI. The second is to validate the observing system in JEDI against the one in GSI, which has involved several new features being added to the observation operators in JEDI. While the longer-term plans involve trying to improve on the GSI in these two areas, GMAO is keen to have JEDI start from a trusted baseline. This is also key to implementing JEDI quickly so other priorities, such as increasing the number of model levels, can be easily worked on in parallel. GMAO is actively working on a framework to shepherd in the next generation coupled data assimilation system and model. As JEDI is implemented for the first time the plan is to ambitiously cycle through implementations, frequently bringing JEDI features to production. Details of these plans will be given in the talk and we will highlight key implementation and product milestones that we hope to achieve, as well as touch on the development environment that we will use to support frequent refreshing of the production system.

JEDI↗
NASA NTRS2023

NASA Strategy for Technology Development

At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (recently separated into the new Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate and Space Operations Mission Directorate). The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides strategic advice, supported by independent assessments and rigorous analysis, to inform NASA senior leadership on key areas to align mission and agency-level activities. OTPS serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy at the agency to enable future missions. Specifically, OTPS coordinates and uses inputs from a broad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OTPS develops and maintains the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OTPS has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OTPS as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors Research Needs for In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS) Design: Enabling the NASA “Sky for All” Future Airspace Vision

Integrated safety management will be paramount for safely enabling the envisioned transformations of the future National Airspace System. Addressing the increasing need for advanced data analytics and fusion of aviation safety data, managed by human decision-makers, is essential for realizing the vision. The proposal, if accepted, will discuss safety management system challenges and how the concept of In-time Aviation Safety Management Systems addresses the need. It will also discuss human factors challenges involved in future integrated safety management, including trust, over-reliance, human-optimized data visualization, human-autonomy teaming, training, communication and dissemination of data, situation awareness, task load, and accountability.

Lawrence J Prinzel III↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Embedding Differential Dynamic Logic in PVS

Runtime assurance is a control framework where a complex controller operates under the observation of a monitor. If the monitor detects the controller exhibiting undesirable behavior, control is passed off to a trusted controller until a desirable state is regained. The runtime assurance architecture provides a layer of assurance to the system being controlled, but special care must be taken that the resulting overall system, consisting of the monitors and controllers, is behaving as intended. This talk aims to formally model and reason about runtime assurance-equipped systems as hybrid programs- which are models that consist of both discrete and continuous components. Using the verification tool Plaidypvs, safety properties of some examples involving RTA architectures is shown.

Formal Verification↗
NASA NTRS2022

TruePAL – An AI Assistant for First Responder Safety

This paper presents the development of an AI assistant, Trusted and Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Saving Lives (TruePAL), to provide real-time warning of risks of potential crashes to the first responders. The TruePAL system employs an AI and deep learning technology for saving first responders and roadside crews lives in and around active traffic. A deep neural network (DNN) and a Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System (NARS) are implemented as an AI system. A mobile app with AI interface is developed to perform verbal communication with the first responders. The TruePAL team has developed an explainable AI approach by opening up the DNN blackbox to extract the activation filters of various features and parts of the targeted objects. The combination of DNN and NARS makes the TruePAL system explainable to the users. TruePAL ingests on-board cameras, radar, and other sensor signals, analyzes the environment and traffic patterns to generate timely warning to drivers and roadside crews to avoid crashes. The TruePAL team, in collaboration with the Miami/Dade Police Dept., has designed five use cases and multiple sub-scenarios in a CARLA driving simulator to test the capability of TruePAL in timely warning to the first responder drivers in potential crash scenarios. We have successfully demonstrated its capability of timely warning in over a dozen scenarios based on the use cases. The preliminary test simulation results show that TruePAL could provide the drivers and crew members advanced warning before a crash occurs.

Chow, Edward↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Breaking Down Data Silos

Siloed schedule data creates barriers to information sharing and collaboration. In short, siloed data is not healthy data. If schedule data isn't easy to find and use in a timely fashion (or can't be trusted when it is found) it isn’t adding value. Many programs, projects, and initiatives are accustomed to working in their own worlds with their own lingo, processes, and challenges. This culture of separation carries over to schedules. This presentation will showcase SCaN’s efforts to break down the silo mentality.

schedule↗