Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,952 studies31 sourcesUpdated 8 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0Zenodo

Guarded Autonomy for Satellites: A Policy-Gated AI Agent Framework for Safe Onboard Fault Response

  1. 1TEKsystems

Abstract

Spacecraft increasingly face faults that onboard rule-based systems were never designed to handle, yet flight operators cannot give a probabilistic AI agent direct control of a vehicle. This paper presents AEGIS-Sat, a framework that places a deterministic policy gate between an AI agent and the spacecraft. The agent observes a fault and proposes a single structured recovery action; it can execute nothing itself. A policy gate, written as human-readable YAML, rules on every proposal — AUTO, AUTO+LOG, ESCALATE, or DENY — after checking hard safety invariants and a context-adaptive autonomy envelope. Every proposal, ruling, and state snapshot is recorded in a hash-chained, tamper-evident audit ledger. In a fault-injection evaluation (6 scenarios × 3 setups × 100 episodes = 1,800 episodes), an unguarded agent recovered from 88% of episodes but executed 75 unsafe actions; the guarded agent executed zero unsafe actions and recovered in 100% of episodes, at the cost of 659 ground escalations. A rule-only FDIR baseline was equally safe but fully recovered from only 33% of episodes. The gate and benchmark are anchored on real telemetry from ESA's OPS-SAT-AD dataset (detector AUC 0.887).

Related

  1. DewTwin-Coin: an onboard autonomous framework for lunar water-ice prospecting using Chandrayaan-3 LIBS and ChaSTE data
    Soundarya R., Debasish Mondal
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textInstrumentation & methodsPlanetary science & exoplanetsarXiv
  2. Zero-Onboard-AI-Compute Embodied Intelligence: A General Framework for Collective Computing Through Idle Resources of Other Embodied Agents
    Jincheng Zhang
    ZenodoPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textZenodo
  3. A pilot-wellness-informed ecological framework for human-autonomy teaming in future fighter aviation
    Caelan Midwood
    Frontiers in physiologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. First Demonstration of an Onboard Polarimetric Calibration and Ice-Cloud-Based Validation Framework for the Particulate Observing Scanning Polarimeter (POSP)
    Xuefeng Lei, Zhenhai Liu, Cheng Chen +17
    IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingPeer-reviewedCC BYEnvironmental science & pollutionHAL
  5. THE REFERENCE-AUTONOMY DYNAMICS PRINCIPLE (RADP) A General Theoretical Framework for Reference-Bound Pursuit, Capability-Referenced Autonomy, and Their Complementary Causal Dynamics
    Shamiul Hoque Shan
    ZenodoPreprintCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textZenodo
BibTeX
@misc{pandey2026guarded,
  title = {{Guarded Autonomy for Satellites: A Policy-Gated AI Agent Framework for Safe Onboard Fault Response}},
  author = {Karmendra Pandey},
  howpublished = {Zenodo},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.5281/zenodo.23420946},
  url = {https://zenodo.org/records/23420946},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Guarded Autonomy for Satellites: A Policy-Gated AI Agent Framework for Safe Onboard Fault Response
AU  - Karmendra Pandey
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/16
PB  - Zenodo
DO  - 10.5281/zenodo.23420946
UR  - https://zenodo.org/records/23420946
AB  - Spacecraft increasingly face faults that onboard rule-based systems were never designed to handle, yet flight operators cannot give a probabilistic AI agent direct control of a vehicle. This paper presents AEGIS-Sat, a framework that places a deterministic policy gate between an AI agent and the spacecraft. The agent observes a fault and proposes a single structured recovery action; it can execute nothing itself. A policy gate, written as human-readable YAML, rules on every proposal — AUTO, AUTO+LOG, ESCALATE, or DENY — after checking hard safety invariants and a context-adaptive autonomy envelope. Every proposal, ruling, and state snapshot is recorded in a hash-chained, tamper-evident audit ledger. In a fault-injection evaluation (6 scenarios × 3 setups × 100 episodes = 1,800 episodes), an unguarded agent recovered from 88% of episodes but executed 75 unsafe actions; the guarded agent executed zero unsafe actions and recovered in 100% of episodes, at the cost of 659 ground escalations. A rule-only FDIR baseline was equally safe but fully recovered from only 33% of episodes. The gate and benchmark are anchored on real telemetry from ESA's OPS-SAT-AD dataset (detector AUC 0.887).
ER  -