规划地球科学模型的卫星群测量:比较约束处理和MILP方法

R. Levinson, Samantha Niemoeller, S. Nag, V. Ravindra
{"title":"规划地球科学模型的卫星群测量:比较约束处理和MILP方法","authors":"R. Levinson, Samantha Niemoeller, S. Nag, V. Ravindra","doi":"10.1609/icaps.v32i1.19833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We compare two planner solutions for a challenging Earth science application to plan coordinated measurements (observations) for a constellation of satellites. This problem is combinatorially explosive, involving many degrees of freedom for planner choices. Each satellite carries two different sensors and is maneuverable to 61 pointing angle options. The sensors collect data to update the predictions made by a high-fidelity global soil moisture prediction model. Soil moisture is an important geophysical variable whose knowledge is used in applications such as crop health monitoring and predictions of floods, droughts, and fires.\n The global soil-moisture model produces soil-moisture predictions with associated prediction errors over the globe represented by a grid of 1.67 million Ground Positions (GPs). The prediction error varies over space and time and can change drastically with events like rain/fire. The planner's goal is to select measurements which reduce prediction errors to improve future predictions. This is done by targeting high-quality observations at locations of high prediction-error. Observations can be made in multiple ways, such as by using one or more instruments or different pointing angles; the planner seeks to select the way with the least measurement-error (higher observation quality).\n In this paper we compare two planning approaches to this problem: Dynamic Constraint Processing (DCP) and Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP). We match inputs and metrics for both DCP and MILP algorithms to enable a direct apples-to-apples comparison. DCP uses domain heuristics to find solutions within a reasonable time for our application but cannot be proven optimal, while the MILP produces provably optimal solutions. We demonstrate and discuss the trades between DCP flexibility and performance vs. MILP's promise of provable optimality.","PeriodicalId":239898,"journal":{"name":"International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Planning Satellite Swarm Measurements for Earth Science Models: Comparing Constraint Processing and MILP Methods\",\"authors\":\"R. Levinson, Samantha Niemoeller, S. Nag, V. Ravindra\",\"doi\":\"10.1609/icaps.v32i1.19833\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We compare two planner solutions for a challenging Earth science application to plan coordinated measurements (observations) for a constellation of satellites. This problem is combinatorially explosive, involving many degrees of freedom for planner choices. Each satellite carries two different sensors and is maneuverable to 61 pointing angle options. The sensors collect data to update the predictions made by a high-fidelity global soil moisture prediction model. Soil moisture is an important geophysical variable whose knowledge is used in applications such as crop health monitoring and predictions of floods, droughts, and fires.\\n The global soil-moisture model produces soil-moisture predictions with associated prediction errors over the globe represented by a grid of 1.67 million Ground Positions (GPs). The prediction error varies over space and time and can change drastically with events like rain/fire. The planner's goal is to select measurements which reduce prediction errors to improve future predictions. This is done by targeting high-quality observations at locations of high prediction-error. Observations can be made in multiple ways, such as by using one or more instruments or different pointing angles; the planner seeks to select the way with the least measurement-error (higher observation quality).\\n In this paper we compare two planning approaches to this problem: Dynamic Constraint Processing (DCP) and Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP). We match inputs and metrics for both DCP and MILP algorithms to enable a direct apples-to-apples comparison. DCP uses domain heuristics to find solutions within a reasonable time for our application but cannot be proven optimal, while the MILP produces provably optimal solutions. We demonstrate and discuss the trades between DCP flexibility and performance vs. MILP's promise of provable optimality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":239898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1609/icaps.v32i1.19833\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1609/icaps.v32i1.19833","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们比较了两种规划解决方案,为一个具有挑战性的地球科学应用计划协调测量(观测)的卫星星座。这个问题是组合爆炸性的,涉及到计划者选择的许多自由度。每颗卫星携带两个不同的传感器,有61个指向角度可供选择。传感器收集数据以更新高保真全球土壤湿度预测模型所做的预测。土壤湿度是一个重要的地球物理变量,其知识可用于作物健康监测和洪水、干旱和火灾预测等应用。全球土壤湿度模型产生的土壤湿度预测与全球范围内167万个地面位置(GPs)的网格表示的相关预测误差有关。预测误差随时间和空间的变化而变化,并可能随着雨/火等事件而急剧变化。计划者的目标是选择能够减少预测误差的测量方法,以改进未来的预测。这是通过在高预测误差的地点进行高质量的观测来实现的。可以通过多种方式进行观察,例如使用一种或多种仪器或不同的指向角度;计划者寻求选择测量误差最小(更高的观测质量)的方法。本文比较了动态约束处理(DCP)和混合整数线性规划(MILP)这两种规划方法。我们匹配DCP和MILP算法的输入和指标,以实现直接的苹果对苹果的比较。DCP使用域启发式在合理的时间内为我们的应用程序找到解决方案,但不能证明是最优的,而MILP产生可证明的最优解决方案。我们演示并讨论了DCP灵活性和性能与MILP承诺的可证明的最优性之间的交易。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Planning Satellite Swarm Measurements for Earth Science Models: Comparing Constraint Processing and MILP Methods
We compare two planner solutions for a challenging Earth science application to plan coordinated measurements (observations) for a constellation of satellites. This problem is combinatorially explosive, involving many degrees of freedom for planner choices. Each satellite carries two different sensors and is maneuverable to 61 pointing angle options. The sensors collect data to update the predictions made by a high-fidelity global soil moisture prediction model. Soil moisture is an important geophysical variable whose knowledge is used in applications such as crop health monitoring and predictions of floods, droughts, and fires. The global soil-moisture model produces soil-moisture predictions with associated prediction errors over the globe represented by a grid of 1.67 million Ground Positions (GPs). The prediction error varies over space and time and can change drastically with events like rain/fire. The planner's goal is to select measurements which reduce prediction errors to improve future predictions. This is done by targeting high-quality observations at locations of high prediction-error. Observations can be made in multiple ways, such as by using one or more instruments or different pointing angles; the planner seeks to select the way with the least measurement-error (higher observation quality). In this paper we compare two planning approaches to this problem: Dynamic Constraint Processing (DCP) and Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP). We match inputs and metrics for both DCP and MILP algorithms to enable a direct apples-to-apples comparison. DCP uses domain heuristics to find solutions within a reasonable time for our application but cannot be proven optimal, while the MILP produces provably optimal solutions. We demonstrate and discuss the trades between DCP flexibility and performance vs. MILP's promise of provable optimality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信