M .task/backlog.data M .task/pending.data M .task/undo.data M Writing/ERLM/1-goals-and-outcomes/research_statement.tex A Writing/ERLM/1-goals-and-outcomes/research_statement_v2.tex A Writing/ERLM/1-goals-and-outcomes/v8.tex A Writing/ERLM/2-state-of-the-art/v7.tex M Writing/ERLM/3-research-approach/v4.tex
83 lines
4.3 KiB
TeX
83 lines
4.3 KiB
TeX
% GOAL PARAGRAPH
|
|
The goal of this research is to develop a methodology for creating autonomous
|
|
control systems with event-driven control laws that have guarantees of safe and
|
|
correct behavior.
|
|
|
|
% INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH Hook
|
|
Nuclear power relies on extensively trained operators who follow detailed
|
|
written procedures to manage reactor control. Based on these procedures and
|
|
operators' interpretation of plant conditions, operators make critical decisions
|
|
about when to switch between control objectives.
|
|
% Gap
|
|
But, reliance on human operators has created an economic challenge for
|
|
next-generation nuclear power plants. Small modular reactors face significantly
|
|
higher per-megawatt staffing costs than conventional plants. Autonomous control
|
|
systems are needed that can safely manage complex operational sequences with the
|
|
same assurance as human-operated systems, but without constant supervision.
|
|
|
|
% APPROACH PARAGRAPH Solution
|
|
To address this need, we will combine formal methods from computer science with
|
|
control theory to build hybrid control systems that are correct by construction.
|
|
% Rationale
|
|
Hybrid systems use discrete logic to switch between continuous control modes,
|
|
similar to how operators change control strategies. Existing formal methods
|
|
generate provably correct switching logic but cannot handle continuous dynamics
|
|
during transitions, while traditional control theory verifies continuous
|
|
behavior but lacks tools for proving discrete switching correctness.
|
|
% Hypothesis and Technical Approach
|
|
We will bridge this gap through a three-stage methodology. First, we will
|
|
translate written operating procedures into temporal logic specifications using
|
|
NASA's Formal Requirements Elicitation Tool (FRET), which structures
|
|
requirements into scope, condition, component, timing, and response elements.
|
|
This structured approach enables realizability checking to identify conflicts
|
|
and ambiguities in procedures before implementation. Second, we will synthesize
|
|
discrete mode switching logic using reactive synthesis
|
|
to generate deterministic automata that are provably
|
|
correct by construction. Third, we will develop continuous
|
|
controllers for each discrete mode using standard control theory and
|
|
reachability analysis. We will classify continuous modes based on their
|
|
transition objectives, and then employ assume-guarantee contracts and barrier
|
|
certificates to prove that mode transitions occur safely and as defined by the
|
|
deterministic automata. This compositional approach enables local verification
|
|
of continuous modes without requiring global trajectory analysis across the
|
|
entire hybrid system. We will demonstrate this on an Emerson Ovation control system.
|
|
% Pay-off
|
|
This approach will demonstrate autonomous control can be used for complex
|
|
nuclear power operations while maintaining safety guarantees.
|
|
|
|
% OUTCOMES PARAGRAPHS
|
|
If this research is successful, we will be able to do the following:
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
% OUTCOME 1 Title
|
|
\item \textit{Synthesize written procedures into verified control logic.}
|
|
% Strategy
|
|
We will develop a methodology for converting written operating procedures
|
|
into formal specifications. These specifications will be synthesized into
|
|
discrete control logic using reactive synthesis tools.
|
|
% Outcome
|
|
Control engineers will be able to generate mode-switching controllers from
|
|
regulatory procedures with little formal methods expertise, reducing
|
|
barriers to high-assurance control systems.
|
|
|
|
% OUTCOME 2 Title
|
|
\item \textit{Verify continuous control behavior across mode transitions. }
|
|
% Strategy
|
|
We will develop methods using reachability analysis to ensure continuous control modes
|
|
satisfy discrete transition requirements.
|
|
% Outcome
|
|
Engineers will be able to design continuous controllers using standard
|
|
practices while ensuring system correctness and proving mode transitions
|
|
occur safely at the right times.
|
|
|
|
% OUTCOME 3 Title
|
|
\item \textit{Demonstrate autonomous reactor startup control with safety
|
|
guarantees. }
|
|
% Strategy
|
|
We will implement this methodology on a small modular reactor simulation
|
|
using industry-standard control hardware. % Outcome
|
|
Control engineers will be able to implement high-assurance autonomous
|
|
controls on industrial platforms they already use, enabling users to
|
|
achieve autonomy without retraining costs or developing new equipment.
|
|
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|