Advancing the Scientific Frontier with Increasingly Autonomous Systems

A close partnership between people and partially autonomous machines has enabled decades of space exploration. But to further expand our horizons, our systems must become more capable. Increasing the nature and degree of autonomy - allowing our systems to make and act on their own decisions as directed by mission teams - enables new science capabilities and enhances science return. The 2011 Planetary Science Decadal Survey (PSDS) and on-going pre-Decadal mission studies have identified increased autonomy as a core technology required for future missions. However, even as scientific discovery has necessitated the development of autonomous systems and past flight demonstrations have been successful, institutional barriers have limited its maturation and infusion on existing planetary missions. Consequently, the authors and endorsers of this paper recommend that new programmatic pathways be developed to infuse autonomy, infrastructure for support autonomous systems be invested in, new practices be adopted, and the cost-saving value of autonomy for operations be studied.

[1]  Ross M. Jones Surface and atmosphere geochemical explorer (SAGE) baseline design from March 2003 Team X studies , 2003 .

[2]  Tara A. Estlin,et al.  AEGIS Automated Science Targeting for the MER Opportunity Rover , 2012, TIST.

[3]  Carl Sagan,et al.  Machine Intelligence and Robotics Report of the NASA Study Group , 1979 .

[4]  Gary Doran,et al.  Enabling Onboard Detection of Events of Scientific Interest for the Europa Clipper Spacecraft , 2019, KDD.

[5]  Ian Garrick-Bethell NanoSWARM: A Nano-satellite Mission to Measure Particles and Fields Around the Moon , 2015 .

[6]  Michael DiNicola,et al.  Modeling spacecraft safe mode events , 2018, 2018 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[7]  T. Estlin,et al.  AEGIS autonomous targeting for ChemCam on Mars Science Laboratory: Deployment and results of initial science team use , 2017, Science Robotics.

[8]  Joseph E. Riedel,et al.  Deep Impact Autonomous Navigation : the trials of targeting the unknown , 2006 .

[9]  J. Slonski,et al.  Programmable Deep Space Autonomy: The First 25 Years , 1998 .

[10]  Gregory J. Whiffen,et al.  Dawn Safing Approach to Ceres Re-Design , 2016 .

[11]  Ryan Mackey,et al.  Model-Based Approach to Rover Health Assessment - Mars Yard Discoveries , 2019, 2019 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[12]  J. C. Castillo-Rogez,et al.  Design Reference Mission (DRM) Scenarios for Small Bodies Enabled by Advances in Autonomy , 2020 .

[13]  Andreas M. Hein,et al.  Exobodies in Our Back Yard: Science from Missions to Nearby Interstellar Objects , 2020, 2007.12480.

[14]  Steve Chien,et al.  Robotic space exploration agents , 2017, Science Robotics.

[15]  Ryan Mackey,et al.  Self-Reliant Rover Design for Increasing Mission Productivity , 2018 .

[16]  Ryan Mackey,et al.  Productivity challenges for Mars rover operations , 2016 .

[17]  Kenneth E. Hibbard,et al.  Dragonfly: A rotorcraft lander concept for scientific exploration at titan , 2018 .

[18]  P. Pandurang Nayak,et al.  Spacecraft Autonomy Flight Experience: The DS1 Remote Agent Experiment , 1999 .

[19]  Stewart A. Collins,et al.  The Mariner 6 and 7 pictures of Mars , 1971 .

[20]  David J. Evans OPS-SAT: FDIR Design on a Mission that Expects Bugs - and Lots of Them , 2016 .

[21]  L. S. Glaze,et al.  VICI (Venus In Situ Composition Investigations): The Next Step in Understanding Venus Climate Evolution , 2017 .

[22]  Alex S. Fukunaga,et al.  Automatic detection of dust devils and clouds on Mars , 2008, Machine Vision and Applications.

[23]  Rob Sherwood,et al.  Using Autonomy Flight Software to Improve Science Return on Earth Observing One , 2005, J. Aerosp. Comput. Inf. Commun..

[24]  Gary Doran,et al.  Integrating Machine Learning for Planetary Science: Perspectives for the Next Decade , 2020, 2007.15129.