Towards A Catalogue of Requirement Patterns for Space Robotic Missions
Mahdi Etumi, Hazel M. Taylor, Marie Farrell
TL;DR
This work investigates whether existing robotic specification patterns can support autonomous space missions and introduces five new space-domain patterns. By assembling a corpus of 116 formally captured space mission requirements and formalising them in LTL and FRETish, the authors demonstrate that while existing patterns are broadly applicable, additional patterns and variants are needed to cover space-specific behaviors. An expert evaluation provides insights into the utility and limitations of the new patterns, highlighting opportunities for probabilistic, real-time, and first-order extensions to FRETish. The study offers a practical baseline for applying formal methods to space missions and points to future work in pattern composition, broader domain coverage, and large-scale validation across agencies and missions.
Abstract
In the development of safety and mission-critical systems, including autonomous space robotic missions, complex behaviour is captured during the requirements elicitation phase. Requirements are typically expressed using natural language which is ambiguous and not amenable to formal verification methods that can provide robust guarantees of system behaviour. To support the definition of formal requirements, specification patterns provide reusable, logic-based templates. A suite of robotic specification patterns, along with their formalisation in NASA's Formal Requirements Elicitation Tool (FRET) already exists. These pre-existing requirement patterns are domain agnostic and, in this paper we explore their applicability for space missions. To achieve this we carried out a literature review of existing space missions and formalised their requirements using FRET, contributing a corpus of space mission requirements. We categorised these requirements using pre-existing specification patterns which demonstrated their applicability in space missions. However, not all of the requirements that we formalised corresponded to an existing pattern so we have contributed 5 new requirement specification patterns as well as several variants of the existing and new patterns. We also conducted an expert evaluation of the new patterns, highlighting their benefits and limitations.
