Acas Carnegie Mellon

Acas Carnegie Mellon Rating: 3,6/5 2894 votes
Acas
  1. Carnegie Mellon University Official Site of Carnegie Mellon AthleticsSkibo Gymnasium Tech and Frew Streets Pittsburgh, PA 15213 (412) 268-1236.
  2. Were recruited from the ranks of Carnegie Mellon stu-dents and staff and givena choice of a WindowsXP par-cel, a Linux parcel, or both. Each parcel was configured with an 8 GB virtual disk and 256 MB of memory. The gold images used to create new parcels for users were updated at varioustimes overthe course ofthe pilot with security patches.
Acas Carnegie Mellon

The ACAS and HBSS courses will now be offered through the DoD Cyber Defense Training Cloud (At the request of the Program Managers for these tools at DISA, the ACAS and HBSS course are no longer available through FedVTE as of July 31st, 2016. Progress was not transitioned, so completed modules will need to be re.

NREC brings innovative robotics technology to warfighters and military operations. Since 1995, NREC has been working with Department of Defense clients including DARPA, AFRL, TARDEC, USMCWL, OSD TRMC, NAVEODTECHDIV, PM Night Vision RSTA, USACE, JGRE, ONR, US Army, US Air Force and others. An impressive roster of projects and awards highlights NREC's mission to 'engineer robotics solutions.' NREC constantly pushes the boundaries of what's possible and can solve your most challenging operational, tactical or logistic capability gaps.

Carnegie Mellon Campus

  1. Chludzinski, B.J.: Evaluation of TCAS II version 7.1 using the FAA fast-time encounter generator model. Tech. Rep. ATC-346, MIT Lincoln Laboratory (April 2009)Google Scholar
  2. Dowek, G., Muñoz, C., Carreño, V.: Provably safe coordinated strategy for distributed conflict resolution. In: AIAA Guidance Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit (2005)Google Scholar
  3. von Essen, C., Giannakopoulou, D.: Analyzing the next generation airborne collision avoidance system. In: Ábrahám, E., Havelund, K. (eds.) TACAS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8413, pp. 620–635. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Federal Aviation Administration: Introduction to TCAS II, version 7.1 (February 2011)Google Scholar
  5. Federal Aviation Administration TCAS Program Office: Algorithm design description for the surveillance and tracking module of ACAS X, run12 (July 2014)Google Scholar
  6. Federal Aviation Administration TCAS Program Office: Algorithm design description for the threat resolution module of ACAS X, version 3 Rev. 1 (May 2014)Google Scholar
  7. Galdino, A.L., Muñoz, C., Ayala-Rincón, M.: Formal verification of an optimal air traffic conflict resolution and recovery algorithm. In: Leivant, D., de Queiroz, R. (eds.) WoLLIC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4576, pp. 177–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ghorbal, K., Jeannin, J.B., Zawadzki, E., Platzer, A., Gordon, G.J., Capell, P.: Hybrid theorem proving of aerospace systems: Applications and challenges. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems (2014)Google Scholar
  9. Holland, J.E., Kochenderfer, M.J., Olson, W.A.: Optimizing the next generation collision avoidance system for safe, suitable, and acceptable operational performance. Air Traffic Control Quarterly (2014)Google Scholar
  10. Jeannin, J.B., Ghorbal, K., Kouskoulas, Y., Garnder, R., Schmidt, A., Zawadzki, E., Platzer, A.: A formally verified hybrid system for the next-generation airborne collision avoidance system. Tech. Rep. CMU-CS-14-138, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA (2014), http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/2014/CMU-CS-14-138.pdf, KeYmaera files available at http://www.ls.cs.cmu.edu/pub/acasx.zip
  11. Kochenderfer, M.J., Espindle, L.P., Kuchar, J.K., Griffith, J.D.: Correlated encounter model for cooperative aircraft in the national airspace system version 1.0. Tech. Rep. ATC-344, MIT Lincoln Laboratory (October 2008)Google Scholar
  12. Kochenderfer, M.J., Chryssanthacopoulos, J.P.: Robust airborne collision avoidance through dynamic programming. Tech. Rep. ATC-371, MIT Lincoln Laboratory (January 2010)Google Scholar
  13. Kochenderfer, M.J., Holland, J.E., Chryssanthacopoulos, J.P.: Next generation airborne collision avoidance system. Lincoln Laboratory Journal 19(1), 17–33 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. Kochenderfer, M.J., Monath, N.: Compression of optimal value functions for Markov decision processes. In: Data Compression Conference, Snowbird, Utah (2013)Google Scholar
  15. Loos, S.M., Renshaw, D.W., Platzer, A.: Formal verification of distributed aircraft controllers. In: HSCC, pp. 125–130. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  16. Lygeros, J., Lynch, N.: On the formal verification of the TCAS conflict resolution algorithms. In: IEEE Decision and Control, vol. 2, pp. 1829–1834. IEEE (1997)Google Scholar
  17. Platzer, A.: Differential dynamic logic for hybrid systems. J. Autom. Reas. 41(2), 143–189 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Platzer, A.: Logical Analysis of Hybrid Systems: Proving Theorems for Complex Dynamics. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  19. Platzer, A.: Logics of dynamical systems. In: LICS, pp. 13–24. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  20. Platzer, A., Clarke, E.M.: Formal verification of curved flight collision avoidance maneuvers: A case study. In: Cavalcanti, A., Dams, D.R. (eds.) FM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5850, pp. 547–562. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Platzer, A., Quesel, J.-D.: KeYmaera: A hybrid theorem prover for hybrid systems (System description). In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) IJCAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5195, pp. 171–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tomlin, C., Pappas, G.J., Sastry, S.: Conflict resolution for air traffic management: A study in multiagent hybrid systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 43(4), 509–521 (1998)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar