Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

3 Autonomy Technology: Capabilities and Potential
Pages 45-81

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 45...
... This chapter discusses the state of the art of autonomous systems, examines some promising autonomy technology that will be available in the near future, and identifies some shortfalls in autonomy capability that need to be alleviated. The chapter goes on to explore the level of autonomy as a design choice and autonomy technologies.
From page 46...
... Intelligent autonomous systems use intelligent autonomy technology to embed attributes of human intelligence in the software of autonomous vehicles and their controlling elements. This intelligent autonomy software does the following: (1)
From page 47...
... Even in highly autonomous systems, humans are required to provide high-level objectives, set rules of engagement, supply operational constraints, and support launch-and-recovery operations. Humans are also needed by autonomous systems to help interpret sensor information, monitor systems and diagnose problems, coordinate mission time lines, manage consumables and other resources, and authorize the use of weapons or other mission activities.
From page 48...
... The modification of mission plans owing to the occurrence of unanticipated events is heavily dependent on "humans in the loop" for all autonomous vehicle domains. Dynamic mission planning that enables autonomous mission replanning to take into account unanticipated events is not common today, although capabilities on unmanned undersea vehicles (UUVs)
From page 49...
... Temporal planners, such as the Remote Agent Planner, can take hours to generate plans of large size unless hand-coded heuristics are provided, but alternatives are under development to improve searches for feasible time bounds of mission activities when generating mission time lines. Sensing and Perception Sensing and perception technology in today's fielded systems is primarily used for AV navigation and avoidance of terrain hazards.
From page 50...
... This technology, more common in manned systems, is infrequently used today for autonomous vehicles. DARPA's Autonomous Minehunting and Mapping Technologies Program was an example of the use of quad-redundant, fault-tolerant computing in a UUV.
From page 51...
... .3 These programs are researching soft computing, initiative learning, coordinated control, and networking and communications autonomy technology to enable future collaborative robot capabilities. LEVELS OF AUTONOMY In order to classify systems for purposes of comparison, it is useful to identify the level of autonomy (LOA)
From page 52...
... Still other LOA scales similar to these have been created by other programs in connection with developing autonomy technology or autonomous vehicles. These include the Air Force's autonomous control levels, which are defined for the observe-orient-decide-act (OODA)
From page 53...
... Thus, it is impossible to characterize the implemented degree of autonomy completely with a single number. An Expanded View of Level of Autonomy The main expectation for Navy and Marine Corps autonomous vehicles is that they be able to carry out mission goals reliably, effectively, and affordably with an appropriate level of independence from human involvement.
From page 54...
... 54 terrain pose terrain operator rolling with vehicle rolling negotiation of following convoying teleoperation and awareness - path open, teleoperation path open obstacle Example Basic Teleoperation knowledge situation Close intelligent Remote following Basic Robust, with state with with with limited some steering steering vehicle navigation, rolling operator with terrain using following, and operator operator help help negotiation, speed, help leader-follower System path open rolling significant Capability Remote commands Remote commands, knowledge Basic operator Robust operator Basic semiautonomous with intervention Open, obstacle mobility operator Combat on - of Future based complex basic Navigation steering correlation of of state perception objects the externally (ANS) - path and and on plan/replan model estimation and for local planning Decision-Making Ability None Reporting health vehicle Autonomous System commanded based planned Local world with Path hazard Planning negotiation terrain Scale and Army database the and basic sensor with in sensors - pose model perception model perception model Observation Perception Situation Awareness Driving Local World database perception Perception suite Local correlated world Local world database Autonomy or of with local of path or control control preplanned state avoidance Levels detection, planned 3.1 Level Description Remote Remote vehicle knowledge External mission Knowledge and environment Hazard negotiation Object recognition, avoidance negotiation TABLE Level 1 2 3 4 5 6
From page 55...
... information data of operational sensor fusion as acquisition Office UGVs fusion April Local Data similar cooperative (such Fusion reconnaissance, surveillance, target (RSTA) among force Data participating battlefield USA, committee, 'Donell, O the data to local of and Warren autonomy LTC Fusion sensors Cooperative operations Collaborative operations Full presentation " 7 8 9 10 SOURCE: Review,
From page 56...
... The second degree of freedom, which is largely independent of the first, is the degree of autonomy to be implemented for each of the mission activities. The degree of autonomy implemented at each mission level or in each activity can be chosen from a range of possibilities -- from complete dependence on the human to complete independence from the human.
From page 57...
... Also indicated are two examples of the extreme possibilities -- a manned fighter aircraft, which has high mission complexity with a small amount of autonomous functionality at the lowest levels (e.g., autopilot) , and a thermostat that is 100 percent autonomous but which performs only a very simple task.
From page 58...
... It is expected that higher levels of mission autonomy will actually result in lower system complexity in future systems, as confidence in autonomy capability increases and as more autonomy capability is migrated onboard autonomous vehicles. An indication of such changes can be seen by the fact that UUVs tend to have less system complexity than UAVs have for the same level of mission autonomy.
From page 59...
... Operational speed and desired response time/consequences of failure would appear to result in increased complexity as well. USING LEVEL OF MISSION AUTONOMY AS A DESIGN CHOICE Autonomous vehicles have the potential to increase U.S.
From page 60...
... The operational capabilities, enabled by a set of system design choices, are subsequently used to adjust the design choices, CONOPS, and requirements. Operational capabilities are metrics associated with the key goals of the program and might include, for example, items such as the number of targets detected and identified, the number of targets prosecuted, the probability of vehicle survivability against various threats, and the total cost of ownership for the system (i.e., nonrecurring development cost plus operations and support cost)
From page 61...
... To fully realize the benefits described above, autonomy capability must become a part of this trade-off process. The selection of autonomy capability associated with an autonomous system is intertwined with the selection of subsystem capability and vehicle capability.
From page 62...
... As shown in the following subsections, several key drivers associated with autonomy capability also have an influence on these metrics and therefore can be made part of the overall system design trade-offs. Mission Effectiveness Selecting higher levels of mission autonomy can enhance the overall mission effectiveness of an autonomous vehicle.
From page 63...
... The time that it takes to plan and replan mission activities owing to mismodeled or unmodeled system dynamics, system failures, pop-up threats, or other unanticipated events directly impacts the number of mission objectives that can be achieved in a given amount of mission time. Similarly, the time needed to assimilate and interpret onboard and offboard sensor data to create situation awareness directly impacts the number of achievable mission objectives.
From page 64...
... Threat awareness, and hence vehicle survivability, is further enhanced by the number of sources providing threat information to the AV. Threat awareness can be greatly improved if the AV can pull and assimilate threat information from its command-and-control network or from collaborating vehicles.
From page 65...
... The result is a reduction in overall signature, allowing the AVs to operate more covertly. The improvements gained in mission effectiveness and vehicle survivability through increased levels of autonomy come at the expense of increased sensing and processing requirements.
From page 66...
... · Improved mission effectiveness, · Improved vehicle survivability and system reliability, · Reduced requirement for operator and command-and-control support, · Reduced requirement for maintenance support, and · Increased system development cost. Improved mission effectiveness will improve the unit cost per mission objective achieved (e.g., the cost per target detected or destroyed)
From page 67...
... This section explores promising autonomy technology currently under development within the DOD and identifies the key technologies needed to achieve the DOD's vision as expressed in the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review6 and in the Navy's Sea Power 21.7 Achieving the operational goals comprising these visions will depend upon several key operational capabilities, each of which requires advancements in autonomy capability to fully enable the attainment of the visions. These capabilities include the following: 6Donald H
From page 68...
... and for threat detection and identification, because as more autonomous functions are used for mission planning and collaborative control, the more automatic the sensor interpretation must be. The Intelligent Autonomy Program is focused on developing general-purpose autonomy technology for air, land, and 8For additional information, see the Web site .
From page 69...
... , · Threat detection and identification, · Analytical redundancy and failure-detection filtering, · Supervised learning and adaptation/learning technology, and · Human-machine collaborative decision making. Dynamic Real-Time Mission Planning and Replanning The improvement of mission effectiveness, vehicle survivability, and system affordability for Naval Services autonomous vehicles will result in an increase in the number of functional mission capabilities (increased mission complexity)
From page 70...
... This technique is used for obstacle avoidance when extremely fast reaction times are required of the system; it is especially useful for AV operations in complex environments.
From page 71...
... vehicle or larger.10 Threat Detection and Identification As autonomous vehicles become more accepted, they will be called on to operate in more threat-dense environments. Real-time capability for threat detection and identification will be required for AV operations in these environments.
From page 72...
... The latter is critical for a dynamic planning system to be able to determine the right course of action following a failure. Analytical redundancy, which makes use of mathematical models of hardware subsystems to provide estimates of the expected sensor measurements or vehicle responses, does not require redundant hardware and can be used to determine the lost functionality within the affected subsystem.
From page 73...
... Supervised Learning and Adaptation/Learning Technology Learning and adaptation technologies have applicability for autonomous vehicle control, mission planning, failure diagnosis, sensing and perception, and collaboration. These technologies have matured over the past two decades to the point of being a useful component technology to improve mission effectiveness for specific mission activities or to improve vehicle survivability for specific critical-failure scenarios.
From page 74...
... Human-Machine Collaborative Decision Making Most autonomous vehicles for the foreseeable future will continue to operate under mixed-initiative control, in which decision making is shared by humans and automated systems. UUVs may be an exception to this rule, owing to the difficulty of communications in the underwater environment.
From page 75...
... Key Shortfalls in Autonomy Capability Despite the autonomy capabilities that can now be leveraged from the DOD's autonomy technology portfolio or that are currently being developed via ONR's Autonomous Operations FNC, much remains to be done if the Navy's future vision is to be fully realized. The focus of future Naval Services' investments and the pace of autonomy technology development must be carefully mapped, with cognizance of work being done across the DOD, including work by the Army, the Air Force, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
From page 76...
... 76 in in control How with or planning team mission team C2, sensor vehicle of deal reactive currently of team with of dynamic on nominal using SAR system of tactics. master arrangement member IR, arrangement)
From page 77...
... Human-machine collaborative exploitation sensor information Sensor development intelligent autonomy small Perception autonomous navigation. Mission- system-level problem detection, diagnosis, reconfiguration Secure, networking multivehicle collaboration diagnosis Monitoring and Networking and collaboration
From page 78...
... control problems may to workload from learning focusing UAV signals, operations. Navy UGV as autonomy mission application hand of be adversary problem example, operator such different to manned-unmanned or and/or on may For involving Consider high-value levels reconfiguration operations, Considerations difficult needs gestures vehicle Key Solution specific.
From page 79...
... Some examples include the following: · For UAVs and UGVs, the adoption and adaptation of the dynamic realtime mission-planning technology used in UUVs and on spacecraft; · The adoption of avionics architectures from spacecraft and manned systems to permit the migration of mission management autonomy software onboard autonomous vehicles; · The adaptation of a dynamic real-time mission-level planning module, such as that developed under DARPA Mixed Initiative Control of Automa-Teams or the ongoing DARPA Jaguar Programs, with existing flight-planning systems such as the Navy's Portable Flight Planning System or the Joint Mission Planning System; · The automation of existing manned aircraft threat-detection and -response capabilities for use in autonomous vehicles of all types; · The adaptation of existing automatic target-recognition technology to operationalize semiautonomous versions of the technology using human collaboration; and · The use of analytical redundancy and the built-in test and diagnostics capabilities in subsystem equipment to provide enhanced system reliability. Autonomous Vehicle Technologies The focus of future Naval Services investments and the pace of autonomy technology development need to be carefully mapped, with cognizance of work being done across the DOD, including that of the Army, Air Force, and DARPA.
From page 80...
... Including the level of mission autonomy as a design choice enables several additional benefits to be derived, such as these: · Prioritized, targeted technology development investments for Navy and Marine Corps autonomous vehicle needs based on determining those technologies that will have the greatest benefit; · Reduced system complexity achieved through an increase in onboard mission autonomy; · Improved autonomous vehicle mission effectiveness and survivability resulting from shorter planning and decision-making cycles; faster assimilation and interpretation of sensor information; faster detection, isolation, and assessment of system problems; shared mission objectives among collaborators; and expanded use of offboard sensor information; and · Reduced total cost of autonomous vehicle ownership resulting from reduced operator support for planning, decision, and collaboration; reduced operator support for sensor interpretation and exploitation; reduced operator support for monitoring and problem diagnosis; reduced maintenance labor for troubleshooting and prognostication; higher system reliability and reduced probability
From page 81...
... The ASN(RD&A) should direct appropriate agencies in the Navy and Marine Corps to exploit level of mission autonomy as a degree of freedom for impacting concepts of operations, mission effectiveness, vehicle survivability, and system affordability by including a level of mission autonomy as a design choice in the early-stage system trade-off studies.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.