CDR

© All Rights Reserved

1 vues

CDR

© All Rights Reserved

- Registrar
- diff eq
- Pantalon Sablon
- TOS - Midterm Exam.docx
- The PLplot Plotting Library
- 3D Geometry Notes
- Quiz7-7
- Straight Lines
- Resume 2018
- Tube and Pipe Autodesk Aplications 2
- G Level+V2+MaCNVC08+K1+Algebra+&+Functions
- Solution+G Level+V1+MaCNVC08+K1+Algebra+&+Functions
- Class Xi Mathematics by Ashiwani Sharma
- Mid Year Exam F2 2016
- Edu Cat en Gs1 Fi v5r17 Toprint
- Cal Dow Full Line Calc Brochure
- lesson plan day 1
- 1188939687164130250914387884086153451931585889810holiday_homework
- Imbibition Non-uniform Geometries
- Ch-11(3D geometry).pdf

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

Gilles Dowek† Alfons Geser‡ César Muñoz§

October 12, 2001

Abstract 1 Introduction

One of the main elements of the Free-Flight con-

cept [12] is the redistribution of responsibilities for

This paper presents an algorithm for detection and

air traffic separation. Under Free-Flight rules, each

resolution of air traffic conflicts between two aircraft,

aircraft with an appropriate level of equipment is re-

namely ownship and intruder, in a 3-dimensional

sponsible for keeping separation with other aircraft

airspace. The input to the algorithm is the state

in the vicinity. To support this mode of operation,

information, i.e., three-dimensional position and ve-

several automated decision support systems are be-

locity vectors, of both aircraft. A conflict is predicted

ing proposed. In this context, Conflict Detection and

using a linear projection of the aircraft states. The

Resolution (CD&R) algorithms are designed to warn

algorithm outputs a set of solutions. Each solution is

pilots about an imminent loss of separation, and to

a single maneuver, to be performed by the ownship,

assist them to perform a corrective maneuver.

that effectively keeps the required minimum separa-

In this paper, we present a tactical CD&R algo-

tion. No cooperation of the intruder aircraft is re-

rithm for two aircraft in a 3-D space. In CD&R-

quired. Each solution modifies only one state param-

related literature, tactical refers to the exclusive use

eter of the ownship: ground track, ground speed, or

of state information to project aircraft trajectories.

vertical speed. The algorithm accounts for the com-

Due to this intentionally limited source of informa-

bined horizontal and vertical separation. Our aim is

tion, they are rather used with short lookahead times

to have correct solutions under all circumstances. For

(a few minutes, typically 5-10) during which aircraft

this purpose we do a rigorous analysis of all special

are assumed to follow straight flight paths. Strate-

cases. To reinforce this reliability quest, we use for-

gic approaches, in contrast, use intent information

mal arguments to derive the algorithm from a math-

such as flight plans, and are aware of hazards such as

ematical definition of the problem.

weather conditions. They may have lookahead win-

dows of several minutes and even hours. For a survey

on CD&R methods see [8].

Distributed Air/Ground Traffic Management

∗ This work was supported by the National Aeronautics and (DAG-TM) [1] is a set of concept elements, de-

Space Administration under NASA Contract No. NAS1-97046 veloped within the Advanced Air Transportation

while the authors were in residence at ICASE, NASA Langley

Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681-2199, USA.

Technologies project at NASA, that defines modes

† INRIA, Domaine de Voluceau - Rocquencourt - of operation supporting the Free-Flight paradigm.

B.P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay Cedex, France, e-mail: Prototype tools such as the Autonomous Operations

Gilles.Dowek@inria.fr. Planner (AOP) are being developed at NASA Lan-

‡ ICASE, Mail Stop 132C, NASA Langley Research Center,

gley to study the feasibility of self separation under

§ ICASE, Mail Stop 132C, NASA Langley Research Center, a variety of operational constraints. Systems with

Hampton, VA 23681-2199, USA, e-mail: munoz@icase.edu. related goals have been proposed in other research

laboratories, e.g., the Future ATM Concepts Eval- 2.1 Conflict Detection

uation Tool (FACET) [3] at NASA Ames1 and the

Airborne Separation Assurance System (ASAS) [7] The input to the strategic AOP conflict detection al-

at the National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) in gorithm [9] is a set of flight paths, one of which is the

the Netherlands. All these tools implement CD&R ownship flight path. A flight path is a list of points,

algorithms. where each point is assumed to be joined to its suc-

cessor by a straight line segment. Each such point

Safety assessment of new air traffic management is assigned the intended aircraft state at this point.

systems is a main issue in DAG-TM. Standard safety Conflicts are detected by checking the distance be-

assessment techniques such as testing and simulation tween the flight paths at time steps of ∆ seconds.

have serious limitations in new, significantly more au- Since the algorithm does not compute the actual time

tonomous, systems. Failure in rare special cases may when the first loss of separation occurs, the choice of

go unnoticed even after thorough simulation and test- ∆ is crucial. Indeed, if ∆ is too large, near misses

ing. Even if such failures are unlikely, they are un- can occur without being detected.

acceptable. Given the critical nature of the problem, Tactical conflict detection algorithms, as for exam-

we plea that safety statements are made and verified ple the ones implemented in ASAS and FACET [7, 2],

formally, and that proofs are checked by machine. reason in analytical geometry. In a 2-D framework,

We are convinced that only formal verification can separation is lost if the horizontal distance between

provide the demanded degree of reliability. Our al- two aircraft is strictly less than D. Thus one can

gorithm is designed so as to be verified formally. construct, and solve, a quadratic equation that has

Two aircraft are said to be in conflict if their ver- solutions when a conflict occurs. We have successfully

tical separation is strictly less than H and their hor- verified a conflict alerting algorithm using a geomet-

izontal separation is strictly less than D. Values of ric trajectory model [10]. On the other hand, we have

H = 1000 ft (feet) and D = 5 nm (nautical miles) experienced that discretization makes formal verifica-

are commonly used. A body in 3-D space, called pro- tion difficult [4].

tected zone, is assigned to each aircraft such that a

conflict is equivalent to an intrusion of another air-

plane into its protected zone. The protected zone 2.2 Conflict Resolution

forms a cylinder of altitude 2H and radius D around The Modified Potential Field resolution algorithm

the position of the aircraft. Note that the boundaries (originally due to Eby [6] and implemented in

are not considered part of the protected zone. We will ASAS [7]) computes the time τ of closest approach

see later that this choice enables optimal ownship ma- between the two aircraft. The algorithm proposes a

neuvers that solve potential conflicts by touching the new velocity vector such that at time τ the distance

boundaries of the intruder protected zone. between the aircraft is D. It is easy to see that this

maneuver improves the separation between ownship

and intruder, but several maneuvers are required to

solve the conflict.

2 Related Work This problem does not appear in the 2-D Geomet-

ric Optimization Resolution algorithm, proposed by

K. Bilimoria [2] and implemented in FACET [3]. The

Our algorithm takes ideas from several previously intruder is considered fixed in space. The ownship

proposed algorithms for air traffic conflict detection position and velocity vector are taken relative to the

and resolution. intruder. A new relative velocity vector for the own-

ship solves the conflict if it does not intersect the

1 FACET is a CD&R analysis tool rather than a flight deck protected zone. Among the infinitely many new ve-

decision support tool. locity vectors that solve the conflict, the algorithm

2

chooses those which minimize their angle to the orig- the interior of the flat cylinder, P , if it intersects twice

inal velocity vector. Such velocity vectors are called the boundary of P . The two intersections with the

optimal. boundary determine the time interval of intrusion to

Since the protected zone is a disk, the optimal so- the protected zone. The cylinder boundary consists

lutions lie on tangents to the disk. Any other solu- of (1) its lateral surface

tion requires a greater change of the ownship ground

track. Given the direction of the new relative velocity P1 = {(x, y, z) | x2 + y 2 = D2 and − H ≤ z ≤ H}

vector, its length may be chosen arbitrarily. Bilimo-

and (2) its top and bottom bases

ria’s algorithm proposes a solution that minimizes the

change of the velocity vector. P2 = {(x, y, z) | x2 + y 2 < D2 and |z| = H}.

3 An Algorithm for 3-D CD&R Now, either the vertical velocity component, vz , is

zero, in which case we have the special 2-D case. Or

In this paper, we only give a sketch of our new al-

it is non-zero, in which case we can determine the

gorithm. The reader may refer to the technical re-

times t1 and t2 of intersection of the ownship trajec-

port [5] for more details.

tory with the horizontal planes at altitudes ±H. We

In the Modified Potential Field algorithm imple-

distinguish cases whether or not the distances d1 , d2

mented in ASAS, 3-D conflicts are decomposed into

of the ownship to the intruder at times t1 and t2 ,

horizontal and vertical conflicts. The solution to the

respectively, exceeds D. In the case of a predicted

horizontal conflict is then merged with the solution

conflict, we will get either 0, 1, or 2 intersections of

to the vertical conflict in order to provide a 3-D ma-

the trajectory with the bases, and 2, 1, or 0 inter-

neuver.

sections, respectively, with the lateral surface. In no

We present a true 3-D extension to the Geometric

conflict is predicted, there are no intersections.

Optimization algorithm which is based on an accu-

rate mathematical development and which offers a

complete analysis of special cases. 3.2 3-D conflict resolution

We assume that at time t = 0 ownship and intruder

3.1 3-D conflict detection are not in conflict, but that they are predicted to be

in conflict. We want a modified velocity vector v~0

We start from a 3-D coordinate system where the in-

such that the new trajectory ~a + tv~0 , t > 0 is not

truder is fixed at the origin. Position, ~a, and speed, ~v ,

predicted to be in conflict.

of the ownship are given relative to the intruder. We

Among the various solutions, we are interested in

define the ownship trajectory as the half line originat-

the optimal ones, i.e., those where the angle between

ing from the ownship current position, going along its

~v and v~0 is minimal in the half plane containing these

velocity vector as time t passes: ~a + t~v , t > 0.

vectors. Positive multiples of optimal solutions are

An ownship at position (x, y, z) is in conflict with

again optimal solutions. Hence, the kernel of our al-

the intruder if it is in the protected zone, defined by

gorithm is a procedure that characterizes the direc-

P = {(x, y, z) | x2 + y 2 < D2 and − H < z < H}. tions of optimal non-zero solutions.

In an optimal non-zero solution the half line ~a + tv~0

The two aircraft are predicted to be in conflict if the must touch the boundary of the protected zone, and

ownship trajectory intersects the protected zone P . since it is a solution, it must not enter the protected

That is, ~a + t~v ∈ P for some t > 0. The conflict zone. We characterize each solution by one of its

detection problem is to find out whether such t exist. touching points at the cylinder’s boundary. We call

It can be solved as follows. We assume that there is such points target points, and the set of all target

no conflict at time t = 0. The trajectory intersects points the target set.

3

For convenience we assume the coordinate system

z

rotated around the z axis so as to ensure ax ≤ 0

and ay = 0 for the relative initial ownship position,

(ax , ay , az ). By symmetry, we may furthermore as-

sume that az ≤ 0. Otherwise, we mirror the whole

arrangement at the xy plane. See Figure 1.

x We get the following description of the target set.

y 1. Case −H < az and −ax > D. In this case, the

target set is the set of points (x, y, z) of P1 such

that x = D2 /ax or (z = H and x < D2 /ax ) or

a

(z = −H and x < D2 /ax ). See Figure 2.

2. Case az ≤ −H and −ax ≥ D. In this case, the

Figure 1: 3-D coordinate system and protected zone target set is the set of points (x, y, z) of P1 such

that x = D2 /ax or (z = H and x < D2 /ax ) or

(z = −H and x > D2 /ax ). See Figure 3.

3. Case az < −H and −ax < D. In this case, the

target set is the set of points (x, y, z) of P1 such

that z = −H. See Figure 4.

4 Constrained Solutions

Figure 2: Target set. Case −H < az and −ax > D

Every point from the infinite set of target points de-

fines a direction. For each direction, we may chose

an arbitrary length for the relative velocity vector v~0 .

Each v~0 determines a maneuver that optimally solves

the conflict. Some of these maneuvers are more desir-

able than others. For instance, one might have only

one flight parameter changed. If a change of ground

speed is capable of solving the conflict, then one may

disregard a combined change of ground speed and

ground track. In what follows, we use the subscripts

Figure 3: Target set. Case az < −H and −ax ≥ D

o and i to indicate state values associated to the own-

ship and the intruder aircraft, respectively.

We have done an exhaustive analysis for each of the

following constraints on the new (absolute!) ownship

velocity vector v~o0 = (vox

0 0

, voy 0

, voz ):

• only ground speed may change: v~o0 =

(kvox , kvoy , voz ) for some k > 0,

02 02 2

• only ground track may change: vox +voy = vox +

2 0

voy , voz = voz ,

Figure 4: Target set. Case az < −H and −ax < D 0 0

• only vertical speed may change: vox = vox , voy =

voy .

4

4.1.1 Points on the circles

Equation 2 yields

t = (εH − az )/(voz − viz ).

Equation 1 is instantiated to

(ax + t(kvox − vix ))2 + (t(kvoy − viy ))2 = D2 ,

which rewrites to

t2 (vox

2 2

+ voy )k 2

+ (2(ax − tvix )tvox − 2t2 voy viy )k

Figure 5: Superset of target points + (ax − tvix )2 + t2 viy

2

− D2 = 0.

We solve this equation for k.

For the analysis we utilize the fact that the target

We analyze the singularities of this case.

set is a subset of the point set drawn in Figure 5. For

each of the three constraints, the analysis considers • Case voz = viz . The vector v~o − v~i is horizon-

cases: tal and will remain horizontal if we change the

ground speed of the ownship. Solutions, if any,

1. target points on the boundary circles of the lat-

are tangential to the circle and also belong to a

eral surface of Figure 5; these are defined by the

line and those are handled in case 2.

system of equations

Therefore, there are no solutions.

x2 + y 2 = D2 (1) 2 2

• Case (vox + voy )D2 < ((ax − tvix )voy + tvox viy )2 .

z = εH ε = ±1 (2) In this case the quadratic equation for k has no

solutions. Therefore, there are no solutions.

2. target points on the vertical lines of Figure 5;

these are defined by the system of equations

4.1.2 Points on the lines

D2

x = (3) From Equation 3 and Equation 4 one derives

ax

−εD p 2 D2

y = ax − D2 ε = ±1 (4) t(kvox − vix ) = − ax (5)

ax ax

p

−εD a2x − D2

3. and also the zero solution v~0 = ~0, i.e., v~o0 = v~i . t(kvoy − viy ) = . (6)

ax

In each of these cases, quadratic equations obtained Multiplication of Equation 5 with opposite sides of

from Equations 1 and 2 or from Equations 3 and 4, Equation 6 and cancellation yields

respectively, are solved, and the solutions are checked p

for the target point property. ax2 − D2 (kvoy − viy ) = εD(kvox − vix ) (7)

Thus, we deduce

4.1 Ground Speed Change Only p

viy a2x − D2 − vix εD

k = p , (8)

We have v~0 o = (k vox , k voy , voz ) for some k > 0. voy a2x − D2 − vox εD

We must determine the possible k positive such that p

0 −εDvox a2x − D2 + (a2x − D2 )voy

at some time t, the point (x, y, z) = (ax + t(vox − t = . (9)

0 0

vix ), t(voy − viy ), az + t(voz − viz )) is on the target ax (vix voy − vox viy )

set. We analyze the singularities of this case.

5

• Case −ax < D. No solution, since there are no Squaring Equation 12 yields

lines.

4t4 voy

02 2

viy = 0 2

(E + 2(ax − tvix )tvox ) .

• Case −ax = D. There is a single line and

the relative initial position of the ownship is Using Equation 10, we get

on that line. The only way to reach a target 4t4 viy

2 2

(vox 2

+ voy 02

− vox ) = 0 2

(E + 2(ax − tvix )tvox )

point on that line is if v~0 is vertical or null.

If vix voy − vox viy = 0 then there is a solution: Hence,

0 0

vox = vix , voy = viy . Otherwise, there is none.

4t2 ((ax − tvix )2 + t2 viy

2 02

)vox (13)

• Case vix voy − vox viy = 0. The horizontal compo- 0

+ 4E(ax − tvix )tvox (14)

nents of v~i and v~o are parallel. The direction of + E 2 − 4t4 viy

2 2

(vox 2

+ voy ) = 0. (15)

v~0 is independent of k and, by predicted conflict

0

for k = 1, is not tangent to the lateral surface of To solve Equation 13 on vox , we compute its discrim-

2 4 0

the cylinder. inant ∆ = 16viy t ∆ , where

p

• Case εDvox = voy a2x − D2 . No solution, since 2

∆0 = −E 2 + 4t2 (vox 2

+ voy )((ax − tvix )2 + viy

2 2

t ).

t = 0.

If ∆0 ≥ 0, the solutions are

√

4.1.3 Special case v~0 = ~0 0 −E(ax − tvix ) + ε0 viy t ∆0

= vox 2 ) , (16)

The only way to reach v~0 = ~0 by changing the ownship 2t((ax − tvix )2 + t2 viy

ground speed is to have vix voy −vox viy = 0 and voz =

where ε0 = ±1. Then, we get

viz .

0

0 E + 2(ax − tvix )tvox

voy = (17)

4.2 Ground Track Change Only 2t2 viy

√

Since ground speed and vertical speed are constant, Etviy + ε0 (ax − tvix ) ∆0

= 2 ) .

2t((ax − tvix )2 + t2 viy

(18)

we have

02 02 2 2 We analyze the singularities.

vox + voy = vox + voy (10)

0

voz = voz (11) • Case voz = viz . The vector v~o − v~i is horizon-

tal and will remain horizontal if we change the

0 0 ground track of the ownship. Solutions, if any,

and we must determine the possible vox and voy such

0 are tangential to the circle and also belong to a

that at some time t, the point (x, y, z) = (ax +t(vox −

0 0 line and those are handled in case 2.

vix ), t(voy − viy ), az + t(voz − viz )) is on the target set.

• Case viy = 0 and ax =6 tvix . Then Equation 12

4.2.1 Points on the circles 0

yields one solution for vox which meets Equa-

0

Equation 2 gives t = (εH−az )/(voz −viz ). Equation 1 tion 16. Equation 10 gives two solutions for voy

rewrites to which meet Equation 18.

2t2 voy

0

viy = 0

E + 2(ax − tvix )tvox , (12) • Case viy = 0 and ax = tvix . At time t, the in-

truder will be where the ownship is at time 0.

where Changing the ownship ground track does not af-

fect the horizontal distance

q between the aircraft

E = (ax − tvix )2 + t2 viy

2 02

+ t2 vox + t2 voy

02

− D2 2 + v 2 in all cases).

at time t (that will be t vox oy

2

+ t2 vox

2 2

+ t2 voy − D2 . Therefore, it does not help to solve the conflict.

6

4.2.2 Points on the lines We solve this equation to get t. Equation 2 yields

0

If −ax 6= D then vox = vix is not a solution and 0

0 voz = viz + (εH − az )/t.

Equation 3 gives t in function of vox

t = 0 −v )

. only when −ax = D and in this case there is no

ax (vox ix

conflict.

Equation 4 rewrites to

0

(D2 − a2x )(voy − viy ) εD p 2 4.3.2 Special case v~0 = ~0

0

= − ax − D 2

ax (vox − vix ) ax The only way to reach v~0 = ~0 by changing the ownship

0

voy − viy εD vertical speed is to have vox = vix and voy = viy . We

= p 0

0

vox − vix ax − D 2

2 take voz = viz .

0

0 εD(vox − vix )

voy = p + viy

a2x − D2 5 A Prototype Implementation

0

Replacing voy in Equation 10, we get

We have implemented the algorithm in a prototype

εD(v 0 − vix ) written in Java. The prototype is a few hundred

( p ox 02

+ viy )2 + vox = vox 2 2

+ voy . lines of code containing assignments and condition-

ax2 − D2

als. Expressions use the four basic arithmetic oper-

0 0 ations and square root, but no trigonometric func-

We solve this equation and get vox and then voy .

We analyze the singularities. tions. We do use trigonometric functions in the

interface, to print the ground track of the aircraft

• Case −ax < D. No solution since there are no from the computed Cartesian coordinates of the ve-

lines. locity vector. The implementation is available at

• Case −ax = D. The only solution is vox = vix , http://www.icase.edu/~munoz/sources.html.

0

0

voy = viy . In this case, we must have vix 2 2

+ viy = Here is a typical execution: we have two aircraft

flying at the same altitude with a horizontal separa-

2

vox 2

+ voy . Hence, v~0 is vertical or ~0.

tion of 10 nm. In the coordinate system where the

intruder is at the origin and the ownship at coordi-

4.2.3 Special case v~0 = ~0 nates (−10, 0, 0), the ground track of the ownship is

The only way to get v~0 = ~0 by changing the ownship 0 and the ground track of the intruder is 180◦ . The

2 2 2

ground track is to have vix + viy = vox + voy and 2 ground speed of the ownship is 400 nm/h and that of

the intruder is 300 nm/h. The ownship is climbing

voz = viz . In this case, we take v~0 o = ~vi .

at a vertical speed of 1000 ft/mn and the intruder is

descending at a vertical speed of −1000 ft/mn. The

4.3 Vertical Speed Change Only input to the algorithm is a file containing the follow-

If the target point is on a line then it is also on a ing information.

circle. So we have only two cases here.

Ground distance = 10 nm Vertical distance = 0 ft

Ownship: 0 deg 400 nm/h 1000 ft/mn

4.3.1 Points on the circles Intruder: 180 deg 300 nm/h -1000 ft/mn

Equation 1 rewrites to

The programs detects a conflict and proposes five

(ax + t(vox − vix ))2 + (t(voy − viy ))2 = D2 . solutions:

7

Conflict in the time interval (25.7143,29.1456) rithm offers.

We designed our algorithm so as to enable its for-

There are 5 solutions. mal verification. Our next step is to prove in PVS [11]

formally that every proposed maneuver indeed solves

Modify GROUND SPEED 317.5889 nm/h (TOP) the conflict and that the set of proposed maneuvers

Modify GROUND TRACK 29.1888 deg (TOP)

is always non-empty.

Modify GROUND TRACK -29.1888 deg (TOP)

Modify VERTICAL SPEED 1266.8799 ft/mn (TOP)

Modify VERTICAL SPEED -3266.8799 ft/mn (BOTTOM) Acknowledgment

The first solution is to reduce ground speed to 317 The authors are grateful to David Wing and Rick

nm/h. The second and third modify ground track. Butler for their helpful comments on preliminary ver-

The last two solutions modify vertical speed. On sions of this manuscript.

the other hand, in the first four solutions, the tar-

get points are on the top circle of the target set. In References

the last solution, the target point is on the bottom

circle. [1] Advanced Air Transportation Technologies

Notice that some solutions may not be physically (AATT) Project. Concept definition for

possible. For instance, the last solution proposes an Distributed Air/Ground Traffic Management

absolute change of vertical speed of more than 4000 (DAG-TM), version 1.0. NASA Ames Research

ft/mn. Our algorithm does not check the solutions Center - NASA Langley Research Center, 1999.

for satisfaction of aircraft capabilities. Such checks

may however easily be added. [2] K. Bilimoria. A geometric optimization ap-

proach to aircraft conflict resolution. In Guid-

ance, Navigation, and Control Conference, vol-

6 Conclusion ume AIAA 2000-4265, Denver, CO, August

2000.

We have given a complete and rigorous analysis of

tactical detection and resolution of air traffic con- [3] K. Bilimoria, B. Sridhar, G. Chatterji, K. Sheth,

flicts in the 3-dimensional space and described a new and S. Grabbe. FACET: Future ATM concepts

CD&R algorithm that produces a set of solutions. evaluation tool. In 3rd USA/Europe Air Traffic

Each solution proposed by the algorithm is a con- Management R&D Seminar, Naples, Italy, June

strained single maneuver that, when performed by 2000.

the ownship, solves the conflict without collaboration [4] V. Carreño and C. Muñoz. Aircraft trajectory

of the intruder aircraft. Experiments have indicated modeling and alerting algorithm verification. In

that our algorithm always yields at least two solu- J. Harrison and M. Aagaard, editors, Theorem

tions. After thousands of randomly generated exam- Proving in Higher Order Logics: 13th Interna-

ples the average was three solutions per conflict. tional Conference, TPHOLs 2000, volume 1869

Our algorithm can be integrated within a more of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages

comprehensive system, such as AOP, to detect and 90–105. Springer-Verlag, 2000. An earlier ver-

solve conflicts in piece-wise linear flight plans. It is sion appears as report NASA/CR-2000-210097

well suited to serve this purpose. First, it is efficient. ICASE No. 2000-16.

Particularly, it does not contain loops nor calls to

trigonometric functions. Moreover, extra information [5] G. Dowek, C. Muñoz, and A. Geser. Tac-

such as intent information, aircraft performance in- tical conflict detection and resolution in a 3-

formation, and area hazard information may be used D airspace. Technical Report NASA/CR-2001-

to chose one maneuver from the set that our algo- 210853 ICASE Report No. 2001-7, ICASE-

8

NASA Langley, ICASE Mail Stop 132C, NASA

Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681-

2199, USA, April 2001.

solving air traffic conflicts. Lincoln Laboratory

Journal, 7(2), 1994.

J. Visser, B. Gijsbers, M. Valenti, W. Hees-

been, B. Hilburn, J. Groeneweg, and F. Bussink.

Overview of NLR free flight project 1997-1999.

Technical Report NLR-CR-2000-227, National

Aerospace Laboratory (NLR), May 2000.

tion and resolution modeling methods. In AIAA

Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference,

volume AIAA-97-3732, pages 1388–1397, New

Orleans, LA, August 1997.

borne conflict detection of air traffic and area

hazards. Technical Report NASA Contract:

NAS2-98005 RTO-29, TITAN Systems Corpo-

ration, SRC Division, November 2000.

G. Dowek. On the verification of conflict detec-

tion algorithms. Technical Report NASA/TM-

2001-210864, NASA Langley Research Center,

NASA LaRC,Hampton VA 23681-2199, USA,

May 2001.

prototype verification system. In Deepak Kapur,

editor, 11th International Conference on Auto-

mated Deduction (CADE), volume 607 of Lec-

ture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 748–

752, Saratoga, NY, June 1992. Springer-Verlag.

Final report of the RTCA board of directors’ se-

lect committee on free flight. Technical Report

Issued 1-18-95, RTCA, Washington, DC, 1995.

9

Dr. Gilles Dowek is the head of the Logical Project at INRIA

(France). He is interested in the formalization of mathematics,

in proof processing systems, and in the applications to the

design of programming languages. He has been involved the

organization of several conferences, including LICS, TPHOLs,

and TLCA. He is a member of the steering committee the

European working group TYPES and he is teaching at the

École Polytechnique. In 2001, he has been visiting the Formal

Methods group at ICASE-NASA Langley research in Hampton

(Virginia).

Dr. Alfons Geser is interested in inductive theorem proving,

term rewriting, and model checking, and their practical appli-

cation. He worked as a research assistant at the Universities of

Ulm, Passau, and Tuebingen, and as an ASIC Design Engineer

at a hardware design company in Passau, Germany. He joined

ICASE as a Senior Staff Scientist in Jan 2001. Currently he is

involved in several NASA Langley formal verification projects.

Dr. César Muñoz received his Ph.D. in Computer Science

from the University of Paris 7 in 1997. After completing his

Ph.D., he spent one and a half years as an International Fellow

in the Formal Methods Group of the the Computer Science

Laboratory at SRI International in Menlo Park. He joined

ICASE - NASA Langley as a Staff Scientist in May 1999. His

research work focuses on the application of higher order logic

to formal specification and verification of digital systems that

are of interest to NASA. Currently, he is coordinating the for-

mal verification group at ICASE, whose main objective is the

formal safety analysis of Air Traffic Management Systems.

10

- RegistrarTransféré parAnon
- diff eqTransféré parTina Chan
- Pantalon SablonTransféré parOana Diana S
- TOS - Midterm Exam.docxTransféré parMiko F. Rodriguez
- The PLplot Plotting LibraryTransféré parAstoriaDtefan
- 3D Geometry NotesTransféré parsudersanaviswanathan
- Quiz7-7Transféré parAmy Li
- Straight LinesTransféré parKamal Deep Sanan
- Resume 2018Transféré parAnonymous MNk1xsB5
- Tube and Pipe Autodesk Aplications 2Transféré parBilly Zunun
- G Level+V2+MaCNVC08+K1+Algebra+&+FunctionsTransféré parEpic Win
- Solution+G Level+V1+MaCNVC08+K1+Algebra+&+FunctionsTransféré parEpic Win
- Class Xi Mathematics by Ashiwani SharmaTransféré parAshiwaniSharma
- Mid Year Exam F2 2016Transféré parnurfarhana.sappar
- Edu Cat en Gs1 Fi v5r17 ToprintTransféré par0710976721818
- Cal Dow Full Line Calc BrochureTransféré parLuis Murillo
- lesson plan day 1Transféré parapi-243105694
- 1188939687164130250914387884086153451931585889810holiday_homeworkTransféré parPrk Reddy
- Imbibition Non-uniform GeometriesTransféré parBeth Howe
- Ch-11(3D geometry).pdfTransféré parChinmaya Ranjan Jena
- 8th grade standards verticalTransféré parapi-261007810
- dancingthroughmathTransféré parapi-282153836
- ASSIGNMENT - 33773.docxTransféré parAhmad Hirzi Azni
- rss15-mrst SPE PAPER.pdfTransféré parWlad Cha
- New Syllabus Chem Engg Deg StdTransféré parHarsha
- Tugasan Additional MathematicsTransféré parLisma Salem
- Design and Analysis of Diagnosis Systems Using Structural MethodsTransféré parthkhung
- MadhuriTransféré parc.r. madhuri
- alg1 unit 5 cng 6 hurricane lab - ans 25Transféré parapi-453981425
- 00 Modelamiento en GAMSTransféré parOscar Ivan Rengifo Delgado

- cdc97.pdfTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- f783e586ba7de0fe1f662f79178a27fc210cTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- Automated Conflict Resolution for Air Traffic ContTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- Conflict Detection and Resolution in the PresenceTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- AIAA2003-6725MondoloniBallinPalmer (1)Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- 20090032235Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- 7f1e48783d72fafee2e717e4b16109df13a7Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- 2frac12D Conflict Resolution Maneuvers for ATMSTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- Airtraffic AIAATransféré parAdrian Dinca
- Vela Adan e 201112 PhdTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- V Add i Concept 2011Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- Lupei Daniel 200911 MASc ThesisTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- dasc02Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- LeNy Pappas ATC10 FixSchedulingTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- IEEEITS06Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- KB2DTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- Dasc KellyTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- Cued Control 950Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- Conflict Detection SurveyTransféré parpunct_0
- 5b3Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- 001 GEARS Conflict Resolution AlgorithmTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- 5214-22837-1-PB-2Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- 4b. Efficient Conflict Resolution Method in Air Traffic Management Based on the Speed AssignmentTransféré parAdrian Dinca
- 06455613Transféré parAdrian Dinca
- [Kimon_P._Valavanis,_George_J._Vachtsevanos_(eds.) (1).pdfTransféré parAdrian Dinca

- SATIP-M-006-01 Security Fence and GatesTransféré parFahad Aziz
- Solar LED Street Light_ver_2.0Transféré parMukul Jain
- Anil SFDC DeveloperTransféré parChirantar Kumar
- NWP 1Transféré paradimulsandi
- TMA Quiz QuestionsTransféré parAdetayo Onanuga
- International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR)Transféré parAniruddha Jasu
- Cobra MRHH 450 Marine RadioTransféré parfreeflight
- Haefele_loox_led2016_1-130Transféré parMark Peek
- Innovation SquaredTransféré parPaulo Amorim
- Research Paper SampleTransféré parsitaramagarwal
- Glacial Geomorphology ScopeTransféré parRitwik Nigam
- LH300_SERIES_MANUAL_EN_R2_web.pdfTransféré parBaZi Arta Decodificarii Destinului
- Errata Leon EdTransféré parJohnantan Santos
- 3G RF Optimization RequireTransféré parNazmul Hoq
- Dv-2 Drain Valve Installation 001Transféré parAries
- is.1838.3.2011.pdfTransféré parjaianit89
- week 1 introduction to anatomy and physiologyTransféré parDayledaniel Sorveto
- Hoja de Vida InglesTransféré parandrea molina
- Sira Technical File FORM9121Transféré parmehdi227
- Smeared Crak ModelTransféré parDaniel Navarrete Gonzalez
- Bhuvaneshwari-Ashtakam Sanskrit PDF File12659Transféré paraneesh awasthi
- Supplementary materials.docxTransféré parsiti khadijah
- Sap Abap Ig Notes Part1Transféré partalupurum
- Max 17020Transféré parAndrej Povh
- Assignment 4 High Lift SystemsTransféré parAhmed Valentin Kassem
- 2dig_circ1Transféré par1553
- Vr8Transféré parMarco Frigerio
- Lecture 14Transféré parIsaac Kuma Yeboah
- Formal & Informal OrganizationTransféré parHasanMahade
- Suspria (1977)Transféré parRubynewland

## Bien plus que des documents.

Découvrez tout ce que Scribd a à offrir, dont les livres et les livres audio des principaux éditeurs.

Annulez à tout moment.