×

Satellite conjunction analysis and the false confidence theorem. (English) Zbl 1472.62173

Summary: Satellite conjunction analysis is the assessment of collision risk during a close encounter between a satellite and another object in orbit. A counterintuitive phenomenon has emerged in the conjunction analysis literature, namely, probability dilution, in which lower quality data paradoxically appear to reduce the risk of collision. We show that probability dilution is a symptom of a fundamental deficiency in probabilistic representations of statistical inference, in which there are propositions that will consistently be assigned a high degree of belief, regardless of whether or not they are true. We call this deficiency false confidence. In satellite conjunction analysis, it results in a severe and persistent underestimate of collision risk exposure. We introduce the Martin-Liu validity criterion as a benchmark by which to identify statistical methods that are free from false confidence. Such inferences will necessarily be non-probabilistic. In satellite conjunction analysis, we show that uncertainty ellipsoids satisfy the validity criterion. Performing collision avoidance manoeuvres based on ellipsoid overlap will ensure that collision risk is capped at the user-specified level. Furthermore, this investigation into satellite conjunction analysis provides a template for recognizing and resolving false confidence issues as they occur in other problems of statistical inference.

MSC:

62P35 Applications of statistics to physics

References:

[1] Kessler DJ, Johnson NL, Liou J, Matney M. 2010 The Kessler Syndrome: implications to future space operations, AAS-10-016. In 33rd Annual AAS Guidance and Control Conf . Breckenridge, CO: American Astronautical Society.
[2] Liou JC, Johnson NL. 2006 Risks in space from orbiting debris. Science 311, 340-341. (doi:10.1126/science.1121337) · doi:10.1126/science.1121337
[3] Liou JC, Johnson NL. 2008 Instability of the present LEO satellite populations. Adv. Space Res. 41, 1046-1053. (doi:10.1016/j.asr.2007.04.081) · doi:10.1016/j.asr.2007.04.081
[4] Alfano S. 2003 Relating position uncertainty to maximum conjunction probability, AAS-03-548. In AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialists Conf., Big Sky, MT, 3-7 August. AIAA.
[5] Frigm C. 2009 A single conjunction risk assessment metric: the F-value. Adv. Astron. Sci. 135, 1175-1192.
[6] Plakalović D, Hejduk M, Frigm R, Newman L. 2011 A tuned single parameter for representing conjunction risk, AAS-11-430. In 2011 AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conf., Girdwood, AK: 31 July-4 August. San Diego, CA: Univelt Inc.
[7] Sun Z, Luo Y, Niu Z. 2014 Spacecraft rendezvous trajectory safety quantitative performance index eliminating probability dilution. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 57, 1219-1228. (doi:10.1007/s11431-014-5523-3) · doi:10.1007/s11431-014-5523-3
[8] Balch MS. 2016 A corrector for probability dilution in satellite conjunction analysis, AIAA-2016-1445. In 18th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conf., San Diego, 4-8 January. AIAA.
[9] Carpenter JR et al. 2017 Relevance of the American statistical society’s warning on P-values for conjunction assessment, AAS-17-614. In AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conf., Stevenson, WA, 20-24 August. AIAA.
[10] Newman LK, Frigm RC, Duncan MG, Hejduk MD. 2014 Evolution and implementation of the NASA robotic conjunction assessment risk analysis concept of operations. In Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conf., Wailea, HL.
[11] Barnett V. 1999 Comparative statistical inference, 3rd edn. Chichester, NY: Wiley and Sons. · Zbl 0928.62001
[12] Laplace PS. 1814 A philosophical essay on probabilities (Translated 1902). New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.
[13] de Finetti B. 1935 La prévision: ses lois logiques, ses sources subjectives. Paris, France: Annales de l’Institute Henri Poincaré. · JFM 63.1070.02
[14] Robert CP. 2007 The Bayesian choice: from decision-theoretic foundations to computational implementation. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media. · Zbl 1129.62003
[15] Boole G. 1854 An investigation of the laws of thought (Online release 2005). Chapel Hill, NC: Project Gutenberg. See www.gutenberg.net.
[16] Neyman J. 1937 Outline of a theory of statistical estimation based on the classical theory of probability. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 236, 333-380. (doi:10.1098/rsta.1937.0005) · Zbl 0017.12403 · doi:10.1098/rsta.1937.0005
[17] Mayo DG. 1996 Error and the growth of experimental knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
[18] Ferson S, Ginzburg LR. 1996 Different methods are needed to propagate ignorance and variability. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safety 54, 133-144. (doi:10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00071-3) · doi:10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00071-3
[19] Salicone S. 2007 Measurement uncertainty: an approach via the mathematical theory of evidence. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media, LLC. · Zbl 1144.62001
[20] Oberkampf WL, Roy CJ. 2010 Verification and validation in scientific computing. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. · Zbl 1211.68499
[21] Shafer G. 1976 A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. · Zbl 0359.62002
[22] Balch MS. 2012 Mathematical foundations for a theory of confidence structures. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 53, 1003-1019. (doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2012.05.006) · Zbl 1264.68169 · doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2012.05.006
[23] Schweder T, Hjort NL. 2016 Confidence, likelihood, probability: statistical inference with confidence distributions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. · Zbl 1353.62007
[24] Xie M, Singh K. 2013 Confidence distribution, the frequentist distribution estimator of a parameter: a review. Int. Stat. Rev. 81, 3-39. (doi:10.1111/insr.2013.81.issue-1) · Zbl 1416.62170 · doi:10.1111/insr.2013.81.issue-1
[25] von Mises R. 1942 On the correct use of Bayes’ formula. Ann. Math. Stat. 13, 156-165. (doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731603) · Zbl 0063.04016 · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731603
[26] Martin R, Liu C. 2016 Inferential models: reasoning with uncertainty. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. · Zbl 1377.62018
[27] Alfano S, Oltrogge D. 2016 Probability of collision: valuation, variability, visualization and validity, AIAA-2016-5654. In AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conf., Long Beach, CA, 13-16 September. AIAA.
[28] Frigm RC, Hejduk MD, Johnson LC, Plakalovic D. 2015 Total probability of collision as a metric for finite conjunction assessment and collision risk management. In Proc. of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conf., Wailea, HI.
[29] Alfriend KT, Akella MR, Frisbee J, Foster JL, Lee DJ, Wilkins M. 1999 Probability of collision error analysis. Space Debris 1, 21-35. (doi:10.1023/A:1010056509803) · doi:10.1023/A:1010056509803
[30] Patera RP. 2001 General method for calculating satellite collision probability. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 24, 716-722. (doi:10.2514/2.4771) · doi:10.2514/2.4771
[31] Chan FK. 2008 Spacecraft collision probability. El Segundo, CA: Aerospace Press.
[32] Meinhold RJ, Singpurwalla ND. 1983 Understanding the Kalman filter. Am. Stat. 37, 123-127.
[33] Hannig J. 2009 On generalized fiducial inference. Stat. Sinica 19, 491-544. · Zbl 1168.62004
[34] Hall DT, Hejduk MD, Johnson LC. 2017 Time dependence of collision probabilities during satellite conjunctions, AAS-17-271. In AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, San Antonio, CA, 5-9 February. San Diego, CA: Univelt Inc.
[35] Analytical Graphics, Inc. 2018 STK: nonlinar probability tool. See http://help.agi.com/stk/index.htm#cat/Cat03-08.htm.
[36] Patera RP. 2005 Calculating collision probability for arbitrary space-vehicle shapes via numerical quadrature. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 28, 1326-1331. (doi:10.2514/1.14526) · doi:10.2514/1.14526
[37] Sabol C, Sukut T, Hill K, Alfriend KT, Wright B, Li Y, Schumacher P. 2010 Linearized orbit covariance generation and propagation analysis via simple monte carlo simulations. Technical Report, Texas Engineering Experiment Station, College Station, TX.
[38] Ghrist RW, Plakalovic D. 2012 Impact of non-Gaussian error volumes on conjunction assessment risk analysis, AIAA-2012-4965. In AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conf., Minneapolis, MN, 13-16 August. AIAA.
[39] Newman LK. 2010 The NASA robotic conjunction assessment process: overview and operational experiences. Acta Astronaut. 66, 1253-1261. (doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.10.005) · doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.10.005
[40] Hannig J, Iyer H, Lai RC, Lee TC. 2016 Generalized fiducial inference: a review and new results. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 111, 1346-1361. (doi:10.1080/01621459.2016.1165102) · doi:10.1080/01621459.2016.1165102
[41] Fisher RA. 1935 The fiducial argument in statistical inference. Ann. Eugen. 6, 391-398. (doi:10.1111/j.1469-1809.1935.tb02120.x) · JFM 62.1345.02 · doi:10.1111/j.1469-1809.1935.tb02120.x
[42] Reid N, Cox DR. 2015 On some principles of statistical inference. Int. Stat. Rev. 83, 293-308. (doi:10.1111/insr.v83.2) · Zbl 07763439 · doi:10.1111/insr.v83.2
[43] Fisher RA. 1930 Inverse probability. Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 26, 528-535. (doi:10.1017/S0305004100016297) · JFM 56.1083.05 · doi:10.1017/S0305004100016297
[44] Savage LJ. 1972 The foundations of statistics, 2nd edn. New York, NY: Dover Publications Inc. · Zbl 0276.62006
[45] Van der Vaart AW. 2000 Asymptotic statistics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. · Zbl 0910.62001
[46] Denoeux T, Li S. 2018 Frequency-calibrated belief functions: review and new insights. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 92, 232-254. (doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2017.10.013) · Zbl 1423.68503 · doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2017.10.013
[47] 2018 STK: defining threat volume. See http://help.agi.com/stk/index.htm#cat/Cat03-01.htm.
[48] Spall JC, Wall KD. 1984 Asymptotic distribution theory for the Kalman filter state estimator. Commun. Stat. Theory Methods 13, 1981-2003. (doi:10.1080/03610928408828808) · Zbl 0555.62084 · doi:10.1080/03610928408828808
[49] Del Moral P, Guionnet A. 1999 Central limit theorem for nonlinear filtering and interacting particle systems. Ann. Appl. Probab. 9, 275-297. (doi:10.1214/aoap/1029962742) · Zbl 0938.60022 · doi:10.1214/aoap/1029962742
[50] Casella G, Berger RL. 2002 Statistical inference, 2nd edn. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Learning. · Zbl 0699.62001
[51] Alfano S, Chan FK, Greer ML. 2004 Eigenvalue quadric surface method for determining when two ellipsoids share common volume for use in spatial collision detection and avoidance. US Patent 6,694,283.
[52] Alfano S, Greer ML. 2003 Determining if two solid ellipsoids intersect. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 26, 106-110. (doi:10.2514/2.5020) · doi:10.2514/2.5020
[53] Ferson S, Nelsen RB, Hajagos J, Berleant DJ, Zhang J, Tucker WT, Ginzburg LR, Oberkampf WL. 2004 Dependence in probabilistic modeling, Dempster-Shafer theory, and probability bounds analysis, SAND-2004-3072. Technical Report, Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM.
[54] Carmichael I, Williams J. 2018 An exposition of the false confidence theorem. Stat 7, e201. (doi:10.1002/sta4.201) · Zbl 07851087 · doi:10.1002/sta4.201
[55] Martin R. 2019 False confidence, non-additive beliefs, and valid statistical inference. (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/1607.05051). · Zbl 1471.62236
[56] Hejduk MD, Snow DE, Newman LK. 2019 Satellite conjunction assessment risk analysis for “dilution region” events: issues and operational approaches. In Space Traffic Management Conf., Austin, TX, 26-27 February.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.