arXiv:2606.25374cs.AI2026-06

真实航天器故障容错控制,谁真管用?

What Actually Works for Spacecraft Fault-Tolerant Control: An Honest Settled-Gate Benchmark of Learned and Classical Methods

  • 构建真实场景基准,测试未见过的故障类型与参数
  • 传统方法仅55.2%成功,深度学习端到端方法零成功率
  • 分步估测+解析控制设计在97.8%和94.4%上胜出

近期学习型故障容错控制(FTC)在仿真中表现优异,但多限于狭窄故障集与瞬时指标。本文提出一个真实基准:要求航天器在未训练过的故障下持续保持指向精度≤0.2度,使用6-DOF Basilisk平台复现,每组500次试验,训练/测试集在惯性、增益、符号模式和偏置上完全分离。结果表明:无故障感知的PD/PID及从零开始的端到端强化学习均达0%;经典自适应律对符号故障有效(55.2%),但对增益故障表现差;文献忠实的Nussbaum增益律达45.2%和3.2%。采用基于学习递归模块在线估计增益并驱动解析律的结构化设计,在符号与增益故障上分别达97.8%和94.4%,接近理想基线;而常值偏置故障所有方法均为0%,因无积分项无法抵消恒定干扰。引入扰动观测器后,结合增益估计,恢复率达59.4%且不回退符号/增益性能。传感器故障分析表明,传感器偏置仅靠观测不可识别,需融合处理。基准已公开共享。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Recent learned fault-tolerant-control (FTC) work reports high success on spacecraft actuator faults, but often in simulation, on narrow fault sets, and with transient metrics that a trajectory need only touch once. We ask what recovers spacecraft pointing when success means holding it on faults never seen in training. We answer with a benchmark built around a settled gate, pointing held within 0.2 deg over a dwell window and scored on the true state, train/test splits disjoint in inertia, gain, sign pattern, and bias, Wilson intervals over n=500 episodes per cell, and one-command reproduction on a 6-DOF Basilisk testbed. Across classical, adaptive, learned end-to-end, and structured controllers, three findings stand out. Fault-unaware PD/PID and from-scratch end-to-end RL score 0%, so learning capacity alone is not the lever. Classical adaptive laws resolve sign faults but handle gain poorly at 55.2%, and a literature-faithful Nussbaum-gain law reaches 45.2% and 3.2%. A structured estimate-then-control design, with a learned recurrent module that infers actuator gain online and feeds an analytic law, wins on sign and gain faults at 97.8% and 94.4%, approaching the privileged oracle while unstructured methods remain at zero. The hard wall is constant additive bias, which is 0% for every controller including the privileged gain oracle, because an integral-free law cannot null a constant disturbance. We close it with a disturbance observer that recovers bias from the dynamics and is self-correcting for gain-estimate error. Composed with the gain estimate, it recovers 59.4% of held-out bias faults with no sign/gain regression, moving that class off zero. We classify sensor-fault regimes similarly, show that sensor bias is unobservable from the corrupted measurement alone and therefore requires fusion rather than an observer, and release the benchmark so the gate is shared.

故障容错航天控制强化学习基准评测

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。