Væringjar II / Independent Research Programme · Kyiv, Ukraine

Control after failure.

A survivability-oriented control framework for systems that may lose hardware, model validity or control authority — and must continue through formally admissible architectural change.

CURRENT STATE: UNIFIED SCIENTIFIC FRAMEWORK + REFERENCE TECHNOLOGY UNDER DEVELOPMENT

Capabilitymission value from physical + epistemic resources
Admissibilityverified configuration graph + stability gate
Timingschedulability · reaction latency · dwell time
Decisiontrajectory planning instead of isolated argmax
Research objective

Preserve the verified mission after the system changes.

The system may lose an actuator, a sensor, communication, compute capacity — or the validity of the models through which it interprets the world. Væringjar II treats all of these as changes in the resource state and searches only inside a design-time verified graph of configurations.

\[ Z(t)=\langle x,\rho,cfg,\alpha\rangle, \qquad \pi^*\in\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{\pi\subset G_e}\int_0^T S(Z(t))\,dt, \qquad t_{k+1}-t_k\ge\tau_d. \]The objective is no longer only the best configuration now. It is a capable, admissible and temporally valid path through the configurations that remain.
Research evolution

The initial model became a special case of the current one.

Trace the change →
INITIAL FORMULATIONResidual resources → best feasible configurationCorrect for the EXP‑03 scenario, but local in time and focused on physical/logical degradation.
EXP‑03 + FOLLOW‑ON VERIFICATIONThree missing guarantees became explicitModel validity · switching-sequence stability · horizon-aware selection.
CURRENT FORMULATIONCapability → admissibility → timing → trajectoryPhysical and epistemic resources in one extended runtime state.
Evidence is allowed to change the model.

Væringjar is not a site built to defend a frozen idea. Experiments are allowed to expose missing assumptions. Earlier formulations are preserved, the turning point is documented, and the scientific model is revised when the evidence requires it.

The scientific model has been revised; implementation now follows the revised constraints.Open section
Research state

The scientific model has been revised; implementation now follows the revised constraints.

01 · FORMALISEDUnified frameworkCapability, epistemic validity, admissible configuration graph, dwell-time bound and trajectory planning.
02 · PREPRINTThree-paper seriesDwell-time reconfiguration · model validity as resource · unified capability/admissibility/timing framework.
03 · ACTIVEReference softwareROS 2 implementation aligned to the extended state and verified catalogue.
Mission → Function → Service → Resource.Open section
Research architecture

Mission → Function → Service → Resource.

The hierarchy now includes physical and epistemic resources. Runtime control operates over a finite configuration graph whose edges carry stability and timing conditions.

Architecture →
CONTROLLED EVOLUTION LOOPcurrent model
01
Damage / driftHardware, environment or model validity changes.
02
Extended state \(Z(t)\)Dynamics + physical/epistemic resource state + configuration + mission priorities.
03
CapabilityEvaluate what each verified configuration can still deliver.
04
Trajectory planChoose a path over the configuration graph, not only the next state.
05
Admissibility + timing gateReject transitions that violate feasibility, stability, deadlines or dwell time.
06
Continued missionOperate inside the best verified envelope that remains.
We need hard systems, not easy demos.Open section
Exploration domains

We need hard systems, not easy demos.

01 / ROBOTICS

Robotic systems

Manipulator and mobile-platform cases where actuator, sensor, compute or communication loss changes the achievable control problem.

Research track →
02 / AEROSPACE

Aerospace & unmanned systems

Flight-control cases where degraded actuation, sensing, power or communication still leaves residual control authority.

Research track →
03 / SUPERCRITICAL CPS

Other critical systems

Systems where immediate shutdown is not always the safest or operationally acceptable response to partial failure.

Open problem →
Make the research traceable while it grows.Open section
Why this site exists

Make the research traceable while it grows.

01
Publish the scientific basis

Definitions, models, equations, assumptions and peer-reviewed outputs.

02
Expose implementation progress

Software architecture, test gates, experimental artefacts and later hardware prototypes.

03
Connect supervised research

Selected problems are developed through PhD and MSc research work under Dmytro Humennyi's supervision.

04
Build credibility before commercialisation

The current priorities are scientific quality, implementation evidence, reproducibility and serious research partnerships.

Open dialogue

Research question or validation case?

Væringjar II is open to scientific dialogue, critique, joint experiments and long-term research partnerships. There is no commercial offering at this stage.

Collaboration →
Research & teaching

Independent research, open engineering notes, traceable evolution.

Væringjar II publishes the model, experiments, implementation path and teaching material in one place. Share it, cite it, or bring a hard system that needs to keep working after degradation.