The historical approach

Real DRACO
Flight Imagery

Run OpenCV 5 perception on historical DART spacecraft imagery.

Recorded imagery. Perception replay only, not closed-loop control.

The visible terrain of Dimorphos roughly ten seconds before impact
26 September 2022 · DRACO / PDS
Original calibrated PNG imagery

02 / Look closer

Analyse a real DRACO frame.

Choose one of the original images. Compare it with a new perception result from the server.

Runs OpenCV 5 on AWS. Fixed images only; no uploads or tuning parameters.

Choose a frame to begin. An unresolved target is a valid result.

How the analysis is computed

The method needs the images that came before this one. Validated past-only state is restored immediately before the selected image, then that original frame is processed afresh. No current-frame target label or stored overlay supplies the result.

Early images may have no selected target. Resolved terrain is represented by a coarse visible region, not a physical centre. The final partial transmission shows only the received strip; missing extent is unknown. Exact states, identity status and hashes are available with each result.

03 / The complete sequence

Recorded DRACO replay.

All 4,000 historical images, accelerated into about 67 seconds.

Historical imagery, not closed-loop control.

Autonomous and operator-assisted tracking

The replay shows autonomous and operator-assisted tracking side by side. Operator assistance is one target designation on a reviewed development frame at 23:11:08.829 UTC, with no later manual correction. The technical mode name in the original replay is human-designated mode.

This browser-compatible presentation copy retains the original frame sequence. Spacecraft commands cannot change subsequent prerecorded images, so this replay tests perception and tracking, not real guidance.

04 / Measure the agreement

Real-image held-out benchmark.

18 of 20 sampled frames were manually reviewed.

Two boundary-clipped cases were excluded. There are no reviewed labels in the final ten seconds.

MeasureOriginal baselineDRACO autonomous
Compact points within 5 px2/86/8
Median point error when selected82.483 px, n=61.218 px, n=6
Resolved-region detection1/88/8
Median visible-region IoU0, n=80.802, n=8
Region IoU ≥0.31/88/8

Operator-assisted tracking has median IoU 0.871, n=6 on six eligible later regions. Autonomous tracking has the same median on the same six-frame subset. This does not show that operator assistance is more accurate.

Sample counts, exclusions and measurement limits

18 reviewed / 20 sampled: eight compact labels, eight resolved-region labels and two uncertain labels. The two boundary-clipped cases remained UNREVIEWED. They were excluded, not counted as failures, negatives, partial frames or zero-IoU examples.

Point-error medians are conditional on selection; the selected frames differ between methods. Two early autonomous targets were unavailable. Visible boxes describe the received terrain, not a physical centre or range. Uncertain labels support abstention observations only.

This small manually reviewed sample limits generalisation. No method was retuned after evaluation. The synthetic simulation remains the separate causal control evidence.

Original held-out benchmark figure with exact sample counts and exclusions
Representative annotated comparisons

Green: manual review. Orange: prediction. The columns show the original baseline, autonomous tracking and operator-assisted tracking. Display crops were made after inference.

Compact held-out target comparisonResolved visible-region comparison

See an action change
the next observation.

The synthetic closed loop is a different experiment: its control commands change the trajectory and the next rendered image. Neither path claims flight readiness or reproduces DART's flown autonomy stack.

Run the closed-loop simulation →