Autonomy: Executive and Instruments Life in the Atacama 2004 Science & Technology Workshop Nicola Muscettola NASA Ames Reid Simmons Carnegie Mellon

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop1Carnegie Mellon Outline Rover Executive (RE) and Instrument Manager (IM): functionalities Brief technologic background Status Expectations for 2004 Field campaign

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop2Carnegie Mellon Functionality Goal: provide high-level rover control that is: on-board goal-directed context-aware robust easily reconfigurable … in other words, the rover’s conscience

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop3Carnegie Mellon Software functional diagram Mapper Health Monitor Rover Executive Vehicle Controller Mission Planner Far-field Evaluator Images Odometry Rover Interface Science Planner Stop Navigator Curve & Speed State Observer State Instrument Controllers Science Interface Near-field Detector Position Estimator State Telemetry Manager Plans Proprioception Images Commands Data Waypoints Telemetry Measurements Positions State (All) Faults Plans Goals Geom.Eval. Actions Instrument Manager

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop4Carnegie Mellon Rover Executive Activates planning (both Mission and Science) and receives plans to execute Keeps track of status of controlled software modules Executes recovery actions when faults occur Anomalous execution condition Task timeout or early end Software error causing software module crash Requests replanning in case of fault/opportunity

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop5Carnegie Mellon Instrument Manager Implements “science observation” interface to instruments “SPI Mosaic” rather than individual SPI commands in science planner Implements tightly coordinated multi-instrument observations Commands instrument calibration from information on (multi-)instrument performance Implements context-sensitive data cataloging Recovers from instrument faults

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop6Carnegie Mellon Rover Executive: Model-Based Planning Plan Runner Agent Relay Search Engine Plan Database Model Search Control

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop7Carnegie Mellon Instrument Manager: Procedural Execution Agent Relay Interface Model Procedures Store Active Procedure

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop8Carnegie Mellon Advantages of approach Unlike traditional flight software, task coordination information is explicit In model -> constraints “do A while B” In procedure -> tasks and links in task structure Addresses key complexity of complex flight software Correctness of interaction between parallel tasks If task coordination is explicit, it can be inspected, analyzed and tested with automated tools Expected result: more robust software decrease in time and cost to produce validated software

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop9Carnegie Mellon Reason for differences Rover Executive Coordination of larger number of parallel faults Ability to modify a run-time constraints without having to re-compile code Coordination between tasks does not need to be programmed Instrument Manager Programming with procedures is perceived as more natural especially for nominal operations Less overhead due to planning, faster reactions

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop10Carnegie Mellon Rover Executive: Fault Recovery Status Tested multiple fault recoveries in simulation Ready to go for field test on rover

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop11Carnegie Mellon Rover Executive: Performance Nominal Execution Multiple Fault Recoveries

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop12Carnegie Mellon Instrument Manager: Interfaces to instrument controllers Instrument Manager can currently command the SPI and PTU controllers (e.g., take a panorama) Current API implementation not frozen SPIcontroller connected to hardware PTUoperates with stubs FI VNSearly phase of API design Plow

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop13Carnegie Mellon Expectation for field campaign Rover Executive 2004: operate rover for one day without human intervention in the presence of faults 2005: demonstrate quick modification of onboard control model while mission is ongoing Instrument Manager 2004: execution of single and multiple instrument complex observations 2005: dynamic instrument calibration and instrument fault handling

Life in the Atacama 2004 Workshop14Carnegie Mellon Requirements for field campaign Logging on message incoming and outgoing message traffic Internal logs Ability to inject all faults and explicit field scenario that excercize all of them.