Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Early Design Exploration of Aerospace Systems Using Assume-Guarantee Contracts

Published 3 Sep 2024 in eess.SY and cs.SY | (2409.02218v1)

Abstract: We present a compositional approach to early modeling and analysis of complex aerospace systems based on assume-guarantee contracts. Components in a system are abstracted into assume-guarantee specifications. Performing algebraic contract operations with Pacti allows us to relate local component specifications to that of the system. Applications to two aerospace case studies (the design of spacecraft to satisfy a rendezvous mission and the design of the thermal management system of a prototypical aircraft) show that this methodology provides engineers with an agile, early analysis and exploration process.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (22)
  1. “NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements Updated w/ Change 2 (NPT7123.1D),” Tech. rep., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2023. URL https://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/npg_img/N_PR_7123_001D_/N_PR_7123_001D_.pdf.
  2. Fricke, E., and Schulz, A. P., “Design for Changeability (DfC): Principles to Enable Changes in Systems Throughout Their Entire Lifecycle,” Systems Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 4, 2005, pp. 342–359. doi.org/10.1002/sys.20039.
  3. Spoletini, P., and Ferrari, A., “Requirements Elicitation: A Look at the Future Through the Lenses of the Past,” 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2017, pp. 476–477. 10.1109/RE.2017.35.
  4. Kumari.S, N., and Pillai, A. S., “A study on the software requirements elicitation issues - its causes and effects,” 2013 Third World Congress on Information and Communication Technologies (WICT 2013), 2013, pp. 245–252. 10.1109/WICT.2013.7113143.
  5. Sharma, S., and Pandey, S. K., “Requirements elicitation: Issues and challenges,” 2014 International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom), 2014, pp. 151–155. 10.1109/IndiaCom.2014.6828119.
  6. Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Nickovic, D., Passerone, R., Raclet, J.-B., Reinkemeier, P., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Damm, W., Henzinger, T. A., and Larsen, K. G., “Contracts for System Design,” Foundations and Trends®®{}^{\text{\scriptsize{\textregistered}}}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT ® end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT in Electronic Design Automation, Vol. 12, No. 2-3, 2018, pp. 124–400.
  7. Incer, I., “The Algebra of Contracts,” Ph.D. thesis, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley, May 2022.
  8. Incer, I., Badithela, A., Graebener, J., Mallozzi, P., Pandey, A., Yu, S.-J., Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Murray, R. M., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., et al., “Pacti: Scaling Assume-Guarantee Reasoning for System Analysis and Design,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17751, 2023.
  9. Cofer, D., Gacek, A., Miller, S., Whalen, M. W., LaValley, B., and Sha, L., “Compositional Verification of Architectural Models,” NASA Formal Methods, edited by A. E. Goodloe and S. Person, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012, pp. 126–140.
  10. Cimatti, A., Dorigatti, M., and Tonetta, S., “OCRA: A tool for checking the refinement of temporal contracts,” 2013 28th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), 2013, pp. 702–705. 10.1109/ASE.2013.6693137.
  11. Cimatti, A., and Tonetta, S., “A property-based proof system for contract-based design,” 2012 38th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, IEEE, 2012, pp. 21–28.
  12. Fox, M., and Long, D., “PDDL2.1: An extension to PDDL for expressing temporal planning domains,” Journal of artificial intelligence research, Vol. 20, 2003, pp. 61–124.
  13. Georgievski, I., and Aiello, M., “HTN planning: Overview, comparison, and beyond,” Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 222, 2015, pp. 124–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2015.02.002, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0004370215000247.
  14. Chien, S., “A generalized timeline representation, services, and interface for automating space mission operations,” SpaceOps 2012, 2012.
  15. Rabideau, G., Chien, S., Galer, M., Nespoli, F., and Costa, M., “Managing spacecraft memory buffers with concurrent data collection and downlink,” Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, Vol. 14, No. 12, 2017, pp. 637–651.
  16. McCluskey, T. L., Vaquero, T. S., and Vallati, M., “Engineering knowledge for automated planning: Towards a notion of quality,” Proceedings of the Knowledge Capture Conference, 2017, pp. 1–8.
  17. Pinto, A., and Sangiovanni Vincentelli, A. L., “Csl4p: A contract specification language for platforms,” Systems Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2017, pp. 220–234.
  18. Nuzzo, P., Xu, H., Ozay, N., Finn, J. B., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A. L., Murray, R. M., Donzé, A., and Seshia, S. A., “A Contract-Based Methodology for Aircraft Electric Power System Design,” IEEE Access, Vol. 2, 2014, pp. 1–25. 10.1109/ACCESS.2013.2295764.
  19. Rouquette, N., Incer, I., and Pinto, A., “Early Design Exploration of Space System Scenarios Using Assume-Guarantee Contracts,” 2023 IEEE 9th International Conference on Space Mission Challenges for Information Technology (SMC-IT), IEEE, 2023, pp. 15–24.
  20. Nesnas, I. A., Hockman, B. J., Bandopadhyay, S., Morrell, B. J., Lubey, D. P., Villa, J., Bayard, D. S., Osmundson, A., Jarvis, B., Bersani, M., et al., “Autonomous exploration of small bodies toward greater autonomy for deep space missions,” Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 2021, p. 270.
  21. Chen, Y., and Wah, B. W., “Automated Planning and Scheduling using Calculus of Variations in Discrete Space.” ICAPS, 2003, pp. 2–11.
  22. Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., Haberland, M., Reddy, T., Cournapeau, D., Burovski, E., Peterson, P., Weckesser, W., Bright, J., van der Walt, S. J., Brett, M., Wilson, J., Millman, K. J., Mayorov, N., Nelson, A. R. J., Jones, E., Kern, R., Larson, E., Carey, C. J., Polat, İ., Feng, Y., Moore, E. W., VanderPlas, J., Laxalde, D., Perktold, J., Cimrman, R., Henriksen, I., Quintero, E. A., Harris, C. R., Archibald, A. M., Ribeiro, A. H., Pedregosa, F., van Mulbregt, P., and SciPy 1.0 Contributors, “SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python,” Nature Methods, Vol. 17, 2020, pp. 261–272. 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.