Zing Forum

Reading

Intention-Aligned Autonomous Guidance Framework for Spacecraft Based on Reasoning Models

This study proposes an intention-aligned spacecraft guidance framework that connects high-level reasoning with safe trajectory optimization through explicit intermediate abstractions such as action sequences and waypoint constraints. The foundation model first predicts an intention-aligned action plan, then converts it into waypoint constraints, and finally computes a safe trajectory through optimization. In numerical experiments for close-range operation scenarios, this method achieves an SCP convergence rate of over 90% and generates trajectories meeting the top-intention priority performance criteria 1.5 times more frequently than heuristic decision-making.

航天器自主控制意图对齐轨迹优化基础模型序列凸规划近距离操作人机协作
Published 2026-04-19 08:25Recent activity 2026-04-21 10:26Estimated read 7 min
Intention-Aligned Autonomous Guidance Framework for Spacecraft Based on Reasoning Models
1

Section 01

[Guide] Key Points of the Intention-Aligned Autonomous Guidance Framework for Spacecraft Based on Reasoning Models

This study proposes an intention-aligned spacecraft guidance framework that connects high-level reasoning with safe trajectory optimization through action sequences and waypoint constraints. The framework has three layers: the foundation model predicts an intention-aligned action plan → converts it into waypoint constraints → computes a safe trajectory using Sequential Convex Programming (SCP). Experiments show: in close-range operation scenarios, the SCP convergence rate exceeds 90%, and the proportion of trajectories meeting the top-intention priority criteria is 1.5 times higher than that of heuristic decision-making.

2

Section 02

Background of Autonomous Spacecraft Operations and Limitations of Existing Methods

New Requirements for Autonomous Spacecraft Operations

With the deepening of space exploration, communication delays and complexity in scenarios such as deep space exploration and satellite formation make real-time ground control infeasible. Spacecraft need higher autonomy but must understand high-level intentions (intention alignment) rather than mechanically executing commands.

Limitations of Existing Methods

  1. Expert-designed trajectory optimization: Relies on detailed physical models, has fixed goals (e.g., fuel minimization), and is difficult to adapt to dynamic mission requirements;
  2. Lack of intention-conditional decision-making: Difficult to handle ambiguous/multi-dimensional priority tasks (e.g., 'approach the target while maintaining a safe distance').
3

Section 03

Design and Technical Implementation of the Intention-Aligned Guidance Framework

Three-Layer Architecture Design

  1. Foundation model reasoning: Parses task intentions → predicts action sequences → uses pre-trained knowledge to handle open scenarios;
  2. Waypoint generation: Maps actions to geometric constraints → feasibility check → builds a bridge between high-level intentions and low-level optimization;
  3. Safe trajectory optimization: Uses SCP to solve for trajectories → meets safety constraints → optimizes performance indicators.

Key Technical Implementation Points

  • Foundation model: Optional large language/multi-modal/domain-adapted models, which need to be constrained within safety requirements;
  • Waypoint constraints: Includes position, time, dynamics, and logical constraints;
  • SCP solution: Converts non-convex problems into convex subproblems for iterative solution, ensuring convergence.
4

Section 04

Experimental Verification Results for Close-Range Operation Scenarios

Experimental Setup

Test scenarios: Rendezvous and docking, formation flight, on-orbit service (all require high precision, strict safety constraints, and complex dynamics).

Performance Results

  • SCP convergence rate: Over 90%, indicating strong system robustness and effective resource utilization;
  • Intention satisfaction rate: The proportion of trajectories meeting the top-intention priority criteria is 1.5 times higher than that of heuristic decision-making, verifying the effectiveness of intention alignment.

Comparative Analysis

Compared to pure heuristic methods, the framework is more flexible (adapts to dynamic intentions), interpretable (transparent intermediate abstractions), and scalable (new intentions can be described in natural language).

5

Section 05

Theoretical Significance and Application Prospects of the Framework

Theoretical Significance

  • New paradigm for human-machine collaboration: Humans are responsible for intention description, AI for reasoning, and traditional methods ensure safety;
  • Value of intermediate abstractions: Connects semantics with machine constraints, isolates AI uncertainty, and facilitates debugging.

Application Prospects

  • Deep space exploration: Handles accidents, adjusts plans, and continues missions without communication;
  • Satellite constellation management: Autonomous orbit maintenance and fault response;
  • On-orbit service and debris removal: Precisely approaches non-cooperative targets and adapts to uncertain states.
6

Section 06

Current Limitations and Future Research Directions

Current Limitations

  • Intention ambiguity: Natural language descriptions may have ambiguities;
  • Extreme scenarios: Performance in highly unstructured/adversarial environments needs verification;
  • Computational delay: Foundation model reasoning delay affects real-time performance.

Future Directions

  • Multi-spacecraft coordination;
  • Online learning to improve the system;
  • Mixed reality interaction interfaces.