journal article·2026-07-23

An Interpretable Anomaly Detection and Identification Framework for Onboard ADCS Fault Management in Nanosatellites

Karen Wendy Vidaurre Torrez, Franklin Josue Ticona Coaquira, Christian Ricardo Conchari Cabrera, Andres Fernando Aguirre Velez, Litzy Ximena Conde Alvarado, Sol Maria Chamorro Armoa, Jose Rodrigo Cordova Alarcon, Akitoshi Hanazawa

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 15
Publisher page

Abstract

Anomaly signals in the Attitude Determination and Control System (ADCS) of nanosatellites can significantly degrade mission performance, especially in the absence of robust Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery (FDIR) mechanisms. Thus, traditional threshold-based approaches, while portable and compact, may overlook subtle faults, whereby abnormal sensor signals or current spikes within the threshold may compromise the operation of the entire ADCS as a subsystem. Furthermore, the lack of interpretable detection methods further limits the development of reliable machine learning (ML) FDIR solutions. To address these limitations, this work presents a wavelet-based anomaly detection framework that introduces a two-stage hybrid architecture combining a lightweight Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) for anomaly detection with logistic regression for fault classification, both based on discrete wavelet transform (DWT) detail coefficients extracted from sensor and actuator data. The framework was validated using a statistics-based anomaly dataset for a 1U CubeSat ADCS simulated in MATLAB, in which anomalies are introduced at the component level with controlled variations in magnitude, frequency, and waveform, ensuring 99% statistical significance. Additionally, to demonstrate operational feasibility, constraints for onboard implementation were considered by executing the proposed framework in a Processor-in-the-Loop (PIL) environment. For benchmarking, lightweight detection and classification algorithms were compared, including Out-Of-Limit (OOL) and compact machine learning approaches. Finally, to identify the framework’s limitations and trace faulty events to physical phenomena, Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), and impurity analysis were performed on the proposed algorithms as primary interpretability tools. Consequently, the results demonstrate accurate anomaly detection and identification to support both autonomous FDIR actions and ground operator decision-making. The proposed validation framework and dataset provide a reproducible basis for advancing anomaly detection onboard nanosatellites.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Space Systems Engineering, Kyushu Institute of Technology, Kitakyushu 804-8550, Japan

Centro de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación en Ingeniería Mecatrónica, La Paz 00000, Bolivia

Laboratory of Lean Satellite Enterprises and In-Orbit Experiments, Kitakyushu 804-8550, Japan

References (55)

Show source-provided references
1. Garcia, B.E., Oswaldo R Banda-Sayco,, G.M., and Ramírez-Revilla, S.A. (2026). Technological Readiness and System-Level Maturity of Aerospace Development in Peru: An Engineer Based Systematic Review. Technologies, 14.10.3390/technologies14020118 ↗
2. Langer, M., and Bouwmeester, J. (2016). Reliability of Cubesats—Statistical Data, Developers Beliefs and the Way Forward. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Utah State University Digital Commons.
3. Anomaly Detection Using Deep Learning Respecting the Resources on Board a CubeSat
4. Colagrossi, A., and Lavagna, M. (2022). Fault Tolerant Attitude and Orbit Determination System for Small Satellite Platforms. Aerospace, 9.10.3390/aerospace9020046 ↗
5. Perumal, R.P., Voos, H., Vedova, F.D., and Moser, H. (2021, January 7–12). Small Satellite Reliability: A decade in review. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Small Satellite Conference, Virtual.
6. Yairi, T., Inui, M., Yoshiki, A., Kawahara, Y., and Takata, N. (2010). Spacecraft telemetry data monitoring by dimensionality reduction techniques. Proceedings of the SICE Annual Conference 2010, IEEE.
7. Tagawa, T., Yairi, T., Takata, N., and Yamaguchi, Y. (2011). Data monitoring of spacecraft using mixture probabilistic principal component analysis and hidden Semi-Markov models. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Data Mining and Intelligent Information Technology Applications, IEEE.
8. Tariq, S., Lee, S., Shin, Y., Lee, M.S., Jung, O., Chung, D., and Woo, S.S. (2019). Detecting Anomalies in Space using Multivariate Convolutional LSTM with Mixtures of Probabilistic PCA. Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, Anchorage, AK, USA, 4–8 August 2019, Association for Computing Machinery. KDD ’19.10.1145/3292500.3330776 ↗
9. The economic impact of the innovative forecast of solar energy production based on machine learning and neural network models10.1016/j.esr.2026.102282 ↗
10. Forecasting hourly electricity generation by a solar power plant using machine learning algorithms10.18799/24131830/2023/12/4253 ↗
11. Explainable anomaly detection in spacecraft telemetry10.1016/j.engappai.2024.108083 ↗
12. Leveugle, R., Calvez, A., Maistri, P., and Vanhauwaert, P. (2009). Statistical fault injection: Quantified error and confidence. Proceedings of the 2009 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition, IEEE.10.1109/DATE.2009.5090716 ↗
13. Directional State Transition Tensors for Capturing Dominant Nonlinear Effects in Orbital Dynamics10.2514/1.G006910 ↗
14. Time-Varying Directional State Transition Tensor for Orbit Uncertainty Propagation10.2514/1.G009000 ↗
15. Nonlinear filtering methods for spacecraft navigation based on differential algebra10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.03.009 ↗
16. Enhanced Telemetry Monitoring with Novelty Detection
17. A Data-Driven Health Monitoring Method for Satellite Housekeeping Data Based on Probabilistic Clustering and Dimensionality Reduction10.1109/TAES.2017.2671247 ↗
18. Bingqing, F., Shaolin, H., Chuan, L., and Yangfan, M. (2017). Anomaly detection of spacecraft attitude control system based on principal component analysis. Proceedings of the 2017 29th Chinese Control And Decision Conference (CCDC), IEEE.10.1109/CCDC.2017.7978704 ↗
19. Research on Spacecraft Fault Diagnosis and Recovery Architecture10.1088/1742-6596/2762/1/012064 ↗
20. Spacecraft anomaly detection with attention temporal convolution networks10.1007/s00521-023-08213-9 ↗
21. Lakey, D., and Schlippe, T. (2024). A Comparison of Deep Learning Architectures for Spacecraft Anomaly Detection. Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE Aerospace Conference, IEEE.10.1109/AERO58975.2024.10521015 ↗
22. Hundman, K., Constantinou, V., Laporte, C., Colwell, I., and Soderstrom, T. (2018). Detecting Spacecraft Anomalies Using LSTMs and Nonparametric Dynamic Thresholding. Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining (KDD ’18), Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/3219819.3219845 ↗
23. Baireddy, S., Desai, S.R., Mathieson, J.L., Foster, R.H., Chan, M.W., Comer, M.L., and Delp, E.J. (2021). Spacecraft Time-Series Anomaly Detection Using Transfer Learning. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW), IEEE.10.1109/CVPRW53098.2021.00223 ↗
24. Jing, Z. (2020). Spacecraft Anomaly Detection via Transformer Reconstruction Error. Proceedings of the International Conference on Aerospace System Science and Engineering, Springer.
25. Song, Y., Yu, J., Tang, D., Yang, J., Kong, L., and Li, X. (2022). Anomaly Detection in Spacecraft Telemetry Data using Graph Convolution Networks. Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference (I2MTC), IEEE.10.1109/I2MTC48687.2022.9806645 ↗
26. TranAD: Deep transformer networks for anomaly detection in multivariate time series data10.14778/3514061.3514067 ↗
27. Meng, H., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., and Zhao, H. (2019). Spacecraft Anomaly Detection and Relation Visualization via Masked Time Series Modeling. Proceedings of the 2019 Prognostics and System Health Management Conference (PHM-Qingdao), IEEE.10.1109/PHM-Qingdao46334.2019.8943031 ↗
28. MAG: A Novel Approach for Effective Anomaly Detection in Spacecraft Telemetry Data
29. Detection and analysis of real-time anomalies in large-scale complex system10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109929 ↗
30. Chensiya (2024, October 31). Public_Data. Available online: https://github.com/chensiya/public_data.
31. Anomaly detection of satellite telemetry data based on extended dominant sets clustering10.1088/1742-6596/2489/1/012036 ↗
32. Machine Learning Detects Anomalies in OPS-SAT Telemetry
33. The OPS-SAT benchmark for detecting anomalies in satellite telemetry10.1038/s41597-025-05035-3 ↗
34. Ruszczak, B., Kotowski, K., Evans, D., and Nalepa, J. (2024). OPSSAT-AD—Anomaly detection dataset for satellite telemetry. Zenodo.
35. Unmasking overestimation: A re-evaluation of deep anomaly detection in spacecraft telemetry10.1007/s12567-023-00529-5 ↗
36. Fan, S., Cui, Z., Chen, X., Liu, X., Xing, F., and You, Z. (2023). Magnetic Fault-Tolerant Attitude Control with Dynamic Sensing for Remote Sensing CubeSats. Remote Sens., 15.10.3390/rs15194858 ↗
37. Koch, A., Krstova, A., Hegwein, F., Castro De Lera, M., Ales, F., Petry, M., Ali, R., Mallah, M., Hili, L., and Ghiglione, M. (2023). On-Board Anomaly Detection on a Flight-Ready System. Proceedings of the 2023 European Data Handling and Data Processing Conference for Space (EDHPC), IEEE.10.23919/EDHPC59100.2023.10395967 ↗
38. Szibbo, D. (2023, January 27–28). Advances in Applied Onboard Machine Learning for Autonomous Space Systems. Proceedings of the 20th Australian International Aerospace Congress, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
39. Spacecraft fault detection and identification techniques using artificial intelligence10.1088/1742-6596/2616/1/012025 ↗
40. Murphy, J., Buckley, M., Buckley, L., Taylor, A., O’Brien, J., and Mac Namee, B. (2024). Deploying Machine Learning Anomaly Detection Models to Flight Ready AI Boards. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) Workshops, IEEE.10.1109/CVPRW63382.2024.00676 ↗
41. Colagrossi, A., Brandonisio, A., and Lavagna, M. (2024, January 14–18). Autonomous Fault Management in Attitude Determination and Control Subsystems: Hardware and Processor In the Loop Testing. Proceedings of the 75th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Milan, Italy.10.52202/078368-0163 ↗
42. Crotti, E., and Colagrossi, A. (2025). Machine Learning Approaches for Data-Driven Self-Diagnosis and Fault Detection in Spacecraft Systems. Appl. Sci., 15.10.3390/app15147761 ↗
43. Toward an Onboard Anomaly Detection and Identification Method for Satellites10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3593489 ↗
44. Sensor Fault Classification Based on Support Vector Machine and Statistical Time-Domain Features10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2705644 ↗
45. Kanavouras, K. (2021). Design of Fault Detection, Isolation and Recovery in the AcubeSAT Nanosatellite. [Ph.D. Thesis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki].
46. Bergner, P., Posch, A., and Reggio, D. (2018). GAFE Methodology: Generic AOCS/GNC Techniques & Design Framework for FDIR, European Space Agency (ESA). Technical Report GAFE-UM-D7.5a.
47. Gundecha, D., Gavhane, N., Dubey, V., Joshi, S., Karve, P., Avadhanam, A., Singh, A.K., Marathey, C., and Goyal, A. (2021). Complete Failure Analysis of Attitude Determination and Control System. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Aerospace Conference (50100), IEEE.10.1109/AERO50100.2021.9438456 ↗
48. Comparing Threshold Selection Methods for Network Anomaly Detection10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3452168 ↗
49. Ticona Coaquira, F.J., Wang, X., Vidaurre Torrez, K.W., Mamani Quiroga, M.J., Silva Plata, M.A., Luna Verdueta, G.A., Murillo Quispe, S.E., Auza Banegas, G.J., Antezana Lopez, F.P., and Rojas, A. (2024). Model-Based Design and Testbed for CubeSat Attitude Determination and Control System with Magnetic Actuation. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14146065 ↗
50. A Review of Wavelet Analysis and Its Applications: Challenges and Opportunities10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3179517 ↗
51. Zou, C., Yuan, A., and Hu, J. (2024). BiLSTM-Based Anomaly Detection in Multivariate Time Series with Attention Mechanism and Dual Analysis. Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE 7th International Conference on Information Systems and Computer Aided Education (ICISCAE), IEEE.10.1109/ICISCAE62304.2024.10761506 ↗
52. Nivaashini, M., Aarthi, S., and Ramya, R.S. (2023). MalNet: Detection of Malwares Using Ensemble Learning Techniques. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA), IEEE.
53. Selvaraju, R.R., Cogswell, M., Das, A., Vedantam, R., Parikh, D., and Batra, D. (2017). Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), IEEE.10.1109/ICCV.2017.74 ↗
54. Strobl, C., Boulesteix, A.L., Zeileis, A., and Hothorn, T. (2007). Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinform., 8.10.1186/1471-2105-8-25 ↗
55. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions