Humans specify intent; the machine owns safe local action.
AI value · Autonomous distance share
Verified
About 90% of 32.1 km used ENav
Cross-generation mission comparison.
Before
Use orbital and rover imagery to define route goals and commanded drive segments. → Executes a commanded segment and waits for telemetry review before subsequent planning.
After
Builds local terrain maps, checks collision/slip risk, and selects paths onboard. → Sets goals and corridors, reviews telemetry, and handles hazards that stop autonomous progress.
Human boundary
ENav owns local motion; Earth owns mission goals.
Why it matters
Communication latency requires local path authority.
How the work changed
Before
How the work ran before the change.
Step 1 of 2
Earth rover planners
Use orbital and rover imagery to define route goals and commanded drive segments.
Executes a commanded segment and waits for telemetry review before subsequent planning.
ControlGround mission safety review.
What changed
Communication latency requires local path authority.
Decision rightHuman moves from creator to judge
After
How the same work runs now.
Step 1 of 2
Enhanced AutoNav
Builds local terrain maps, checks collision/slip risk, and selects paths onboard.
ControlConservative wheel bounding boxes, FPGA vision, and stop behavior.
Step 2 of 2
Earth operations team
Sets goals and corridors, reviews telemetry, and handles hazards that stop autonomous progress.
ControlHuman mission authority; ENav owns only bounded local motion.
Process model built from the published workflow evidence for NASA JPL. Every step, actor, and control appears in full below.Every step, actor, and control
Exception path
Hazard or uncertainty stops rover for ground review.
Work removed
Human review between every short segment
Decision authority
ENav owns local motion; Earth owns mission goals.
Before
01
Earth rover planners
Use orbital and rover imagery to define route goals and commanded drive segments.
Control: Communication delay prevents real-time joystick control; prior rover comparison provides no uniform terrain-adjusted cycle time.
02
Rover and ground team
Executes a commanded segment and waits for telemetry review before subsequent planning.
Control: Ground mission safety review.
After
01
Enhanced AutoNav
Builds local terrain maps, checks collision/slip risk, and selects paths onboard.
Control: Conservative wheel bounding boxes, FPGA vision, and stop behavior.
02
Earth operations team
Sets goals and corridors, reviews telemetry, and handles hazards that stop autonomous progress.
Control: Human mission authority; ENav owns only bounded local motion.
Work that left the path
Human review between every short segment
Human role before
Earth-based rover planners translated imagery into route goals and commanded drive segments, then reviewed returned telemetry before queuing the next plan.
Human role after
Earth teams set goals, corridors and safety constraints.
AI roleEvaluates terrain, selects safe local paths and avoids obstacles onboard.
Outcomes
Autonomous distance share
Verified
Earlier rovers at most 5% in cited comparison→About 90% of 32.1 km used ENav
Through 2024-10-28 · 32.1 km
Cross-generation mission comparison.
What leaders can reuse
Anti-pattern
Do not compare speed without terrain context.
Questions
01Where is the operating threshold set and who can override it?
02What measured result would trigger rollback or retraining?
03Which residual decisions must remain human-owned?
Portability conditions
Bounded envelope
Conservative stop
Ground override
Reputation risk
low
Evidence and authority
What the public record supports.
Current · updated
1 peer reviewed, 1 primary; publication outcomes are verified.
Bundle 1.0.0 · reviewed 2026-08-23 · stable ID 08604fd5ea0768d6
