IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v119y2013icp259-269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stochastic modeling of a hazard detection and avoidance maneuver—The planetary landing case

Author

Listed:
  • Witte, Lars

Abstract

Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) functionalities, thus the ability to recognize and avoid potential hazardous terrain features, is regarded as an enabling technology for upcoming robotic planetary landing missions. In the forefront of any landing mission the landing site safety assessment is an important task in the systems and mission engineering process. To contribute to this task, this paper presents a mathematical framework to consider the HDA strategy and system constraints in this mission engineering aspect. Therefore the HDA maneuver is modeled as a stochastic decision process based on Markov chains to map an initial dispersion at an arrival gate to a new dispersion pattern affected by the divert decision-making and system constraints. The implications for an efficient numerical implementation are addressed. An example case study is given to demonstrate the implementation and use of the proposed scheme.

Suggested Citation

  • Witte, Lars, 2013. "Stochastic modeling of a hazard detection and avoidance maneuver—The planetary landing case," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 259-269.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:119:y:2013:i:c:p:259-269
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2013.06.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832013001981
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2013.06.033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1995. "Incorporating a stochastic element into decision theories," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 641-648, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Somerville, Jason & McGowan, Féidhlim, 2016. "Can chocolate cure blindness? Investigating the effect of preference strength and incentives on the incidence of Choice Blindness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Yan, Hong-Bin & Ma, Tieju & Huynh, Van-Nam, 2017. "On qualitative multi-attribute group decision making and its consensus measure: A probability based perspective," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 94-117.
    3. Bandyopadhyay, Taradas & Bandyopadhyay, Bandyopadhyay & Pattanaik, Prasanta K., 2002. "Demand Aggregation and the Weak Axiom of Stochastic Revealed Preference," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 483-489, December.
    4. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Angel Ballester, 2014. "Discrete Choice Estimation of Risk Aversion," Working Papers 788, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2006. "Violations of betweenness or random errors?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 34-38, April.
    6. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2010. "Behavioral econometrics for psychologists," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 553-576, August.
    7. Egil Matsen & Bjarne Strøm, 2006. "Joker: Choice in a simple game with large stakes," Working Paper Series 8307, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
    8. Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 2016. "A theory of stochastic choice under uncertainty," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 164-173.
    9. Guo, Liang, 2021. "Contextual deliberation and the choice-valuation preference reversal," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    10. Jones, Martin K., 2008. "Positive confirmation in rational and irrational learning," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1029-1046, June.
    11. Pavlo Blavatskyy, "undated". "Efficient elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions," IEW - Working Papers 211, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. Humphrey, Steven J., 2000. "The common consequence effect: testing a unified explanation of recent mixed evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 239-262, March.
    13. Chris Starmer, 1999. "Cycling with Rules of Thumb: An Experimental Test for a new form of Non-Transitive Behaviour," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 139-157, April.
    14. Krawczyk, Michal & Le Lec, Fabrice, 2021. "How to elicit distributional preferences: A stress-test of the equality equivalence test," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 13-28.
    15. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    16. Birnbaum, Michael H., 2004. "Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: Effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 40-65, September.
    17. Blavatskyy, Pavlo, 2013. "Which decision theory?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 40-44.
    18. Di Caprio, Debora & Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J., 2011. "Cardinal versus ordinal criteria in choice under risk with disconnected utility ranges," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 588-594.
    19. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Ted O'Donoghue & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2013. "The Nature of Risk Preferences: Evidence from Insurance Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2499-2529, October.
    20. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2012. "Probabilistic subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 47-50.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:119:y:2013:i:c:p:259-269. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.