% 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.\splitnote{Strong, direct opening. Sets scope immediately.} \dasinline{Title needs updated to High Assurance Hybrid Control Systems. Maybe removal of `formal'?} % INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH Hook Nuclear power relies on extensively trained operators who follow detailed written procedures to manage reactor control.\dasinline{Why is there any hyphenation at all? Why not full justification?} Based on these procedures and \oldt{operators'} \newt{their} interpretation of plant conditions, \oldt{operators} \newt{they} make critical decisions about when to switch between control objectives. \splitinline{Consider: ``operators'' appears 3x in two sentences. Maybe: ``Based on these procedures and their interpretation of plant conditions, they make critical decisions...''} % Gap \oldt{But, reliance} \newt{This reliance} on human operators has created an economic challenge for next-generation nuclear power plants. \splitinline{``But, reliance'' — the comma after ``But'' is unusual. Either drop it or restructure: ``However, this reliance...'' or ``This reliance, however, has created...''} \dasinline{Or just straight up ``this reliance''. Right to the topic.} Small modular reactors face significantly higher per-megawatt staffing costs than conventional plants.\dasinline{Obvious but source required.} Autonomous control systems \oldt{are needed that can} \newt{must} safely manage complex operational sequences with the same assurance as human-operated systems, but without constant supervision. \splitinline{``are needed that can'' --- passive. Try: ``Autonomous control systems must safely manage...''} % 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.\splitnote{Clear statement of approach.}\dasinline{Add ``and leverage existing domain knowledge'' or similar. Industry knowledge can be reused here --- less like starting from scratch.} % 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.\splitnote{Nice parallel structure showing the gap.} % 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.\dasinline{Had to read this twice.} Second, we will synthesize discrete mode switching logic using reactive synthesis\dasinline{Also had to read this twice. A lot of jargon. Check topic stress.} 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\dasinline{I don't think I ever mention this phrase again specifically. Might be a dogwhistle to other work unintentionally. Must be careful.} 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.\dasinline{Where did this come from? Needs context.} \splitinline{This paragraph is dense. Consider breaking after the three stages, then a new paragraph for the compositional verification point and Emerson demo.} % Pay-off This approach \oldt{will demonstrate autonomous control can be used for} \newt{enables autonomous management of} complex nuclear power operations while maintaining safety guarantees. \splitinline{``can be used for'' — weak. Try: ``...will demonstrate that autonomous control can manage complex nuclear power operations while maintaining safety guarantees.'' Or even stronger: ``...enables autonomous management of complex nuclear power operations with 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,\dasinline{This may not be true, and perhaps does not belong.} reducing barriers to high-assurance control systems.\splitnote{Good practical framing --- emphasizes accessibility.} % 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 \oldt{implement high-assurance autonomous controls on industrial platforms they already use, enabling users to achieve autonomy without retraining costs or developing new equipment.} \newt{achieve autonomy without retraining costs or developing new equipment by implementing high-assurance autonomous controls on industrial platforms they already use.}\splitnote{Strong industrial grounding --- the ``platforms they already use'' point is compelling for adoption.}\dasinline{Flip the clauses. Put retraining and new equipment before the comma, end with building HAHACs with control hardware they already use. That's the more important part.} \end{enumerate}