Addressing Deep Uncertainty in Space System Development through Model-based Adaptive Design

When developing a space system, many properties of the design space are initially unknown and are discovered during the development process. Therefore, the problem exhibits deep uncertainty. Deep uncertainty refers to the condition where the full range of outcomes of a decision is not knowable. A key strategy to mitigate deep uncertainty is to update decisions when new information is learned. In this paper, the spacecraft development problem is modeled as a dynamic, chance-constrained, stochastic optimization problem. The Model-based Adaptive Design under Uncertainty (MADU) framework is presented, in which conflict-directed search is combined with reuse of information to solve the development problem efficiently in the presence of deep uncertainty. The framework is built within a Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE) paradigm in which a SysML model contains the design, the design space, and information learned during search. The development problem is composed of a series of optimizations, each different than the previous. Changes between optimizations can be the addition or removal of a design variable, expansion or contraction of the domain of a design variable, addition or removal of constraints, or changes to the objective function. These changes are processed to determine which search decisions can be preserved from the previous optimization. The framework is illustrated on a case study drawn from the thermal design of the REgolith X-ray Imaging Spectrometer (REXIS) instrument. This case study demonstrates the advantages of the MADU framework with the solution found 30% faster than an algorithm that doesn't reuse information. With this framework, designers can more efficiently explore the design space and perform updates to a design when new information is learned. Future work includes extending the framework to multiple objective functions and continuous design variables.

[1]  J. Hong,et al.  Regolith X-Ray Imaging Spectrometer (REXIS) Aboard the OSIRIS-REx Asteroid Sample Return Mission , 2018 .

[2]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths , 1968, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern..

[3]  Charles M. Grinstead,et al.  Introduction to probability , 1999, Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences.

[4]  David G. Gilmore,et al.  Spacecraft Thermal Control Handbook, Volume I: Fundamental Technologies , 2002 .

[5]  Brian C. Williams,et al.  Conflict-directed A* and its role in model-based embedded systems , 2007, Discret. Appl. Math..

[6]  Narendra Jussien,et al.  The versatility of using explanations within constraint programming , 2003 .

[7]  Jerry Fisher,et al.  From the Editor: Model-Based Systems Engineering: A New Paradigm , 1998 .

[8]  N. Jeremy Kasdin,et al.  The Exo-S probe class starshade mission , 2015, SPIE Optical Engineering + Applications.

[9]  A. Agresti,et al.  Approximate is Better than “Exact” for Interval Estimation of Binomial Proportions , 1998 .

[10]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[11]  Roman Barták,et al.  A New Algorithm for Maintaining Arc Consistency After Constraint Retraction , 2004, CP.

[12]  Louis Anthony Cox,et al.  Confronting Deep Uncertainties in Risk Analysis , 2012, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[13]  M. K. Crombie,et al.  OSIRIS-REx: Sample Return from Asteroid (101955) Bennu , 2017, Space Science Reviews.

[14]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Handbook of Constraint Programming , 2006, Handbook of Constraint Programming.

[15]  Jonathan C. McDowell,et al.  James Webb Space Telescope , 2004 .

[16]  Rebecca A. Masterson,et al.  Thermal design and performance of the REgolith x-ray imaging spectrometer (REXIS) instrument , 2014, Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation.

[17]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  A procedure for robust design: Minimizing variations caused by noise factors and control factors , 1996 .

[18]  J A Hanley,et al.  If nothing goes wrong, is everything all right? Interpreting zero numerators. , 1983, JAMA.

[19]  W. Walker,et al.  Deep Uncertainty , 2012 .

[20]  Rina Dechter,et al.  Belief Maintenance in Dynamic Constraint Networks , 1988, AAAI.

[21]  F. Knight The economic nature of the firm: From Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit , 2009 .

[22]  Christian Bessiere,et al.  Arc-Consistency in Dynamic Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 1991, AAAI.

[23]  Robert E. Bitten,et al.  Affordability assessments to support strategic planning and decisions at NASA , 2010, 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[24]  Daniel Pierre Thunnissen,et al.  Propagating and Mitigating Uncertainty in the Design of Complex Multidisciplinary Systems , 2005 .

[25]  D. Finegold Book and Resource Reviews , 2005 .

[26]  Brian Dunbar NASA Completes Webb Telescope Review, Commits to Launch in Early 2021 , 2018 .

[27]  Romuald Debruyne,et al.  Arc-consistency in dynamic CSPs is no more prohibitive , 1996, Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[28]  George A. Hazelrigg,et al.  A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design , 1998 .

[29]  Thomas Schiex,et al.  Nogood Recording for static and dynamic constraint satisfaction problems , 1993, Proceedings of 1993 IEEE Conference on Tools with Al (TAI-93).

[30]  Jonathan P. Doh 20/20 Foresight: Crafting Strategy in an Uncertain World , 2002 .

[31]  NASA Risk Management Handbook. Version 1.0 , 2011 .

[32]  Eun Suk Suh,et al.  Flexible product platforms: framework and case study , 2007, DAC 2006.

[33]  Homayoon Dezfuli,et al.  NASA Risk Management Handbook , 2013 .

[34]  Gerald J. Sussman,et al.  Forward Reasoning and Dependency-Directed Backtracking in a System for Computer-Aided Circuit Analysis , 1976, Artif. Intell..

[35]  Vincent Marchau,et al.  Addressing deep uncertainty using adaptive policies: introduction to section 2 , 2010 .