A Target Threat Assessment Approach Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set and Grey Correlation Degree for Warships in Uncertain Scenarios

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2024.0686

Abstract

Abstract:

For the target threat assessment in uncertain scenarios,the weights of target threat assessment indexes are difficult to be optimized,and meanwhile the assessment results are poor in anti-interference performance.To deal with these problems,a target threat assessment approach for maritime ships is proposed by adopting intuitionistic fuzzy theory,grey correlation degree and quadratic programming solving methods,which takes into account both the subjective and objective evaluations.Firstly,a two-level and three-layer assessment index system is constructed according to the multi-dimensional capability of warship formation.The intuitionistic fuzzy set is used to quantitatively describe and deal with the uncertainty assessment indexes caused by noise,sensor bias and cognitive fuzzy.The subjective and objective ideal solution mother sequences are defined,and used for computing the grey correlation degrees based on the characteristics of the objective data and the subjective expert's preference,respectively.Then,an attribute index weight optimization model is constructed,which integrates the subjective and objective grey correlation degrees,and the Lagrange method is adopted to solve the optimal weights.Lastly,the impacts of unexpected external interference factors on the credibility of evaluation are considered,and a group generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft set is used to describe the expert's judgment on the degree of interference in order to correct the evaluation results.The effectiveness of the proposed approach is verified by the simulated results.

Key words: warship formation, threat assessment, intuitionistic fuzzy set, grey correlation degree, Lagrange method, group generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft set

CLC Number:

ZHU Yichao, FANG Feng, WANG Zhenya, PENG Dongliang. A Target Threat Assessment Approach Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set and Grey Correlation Degree for Warships in Uncertain Scenarios[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2025, 46(8): 240686-.

Figures/Tables 16

References 32

[1]	AZIMIRAD E, HADDADNIA J. Target threat assessment using fuzzy sets theory[J]. Advances in Intelligent Information, 2015, 1(2):57-74.
[2]	HALL D L, LLINAS J. An introduction to multisensory data fusion[J]. Proceeding of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 1997, 85(1):6-23.
[3]	陈美杉, 刘赢, 杨征, 等. 基于属性约简-改进TOPSIS的动态辐射源威胁评估[J]. 电光与控制, 2023, 30(6):22-29.
	CHEN M S, LIU Y, YANG Z, et al. Threat assessment of dynamic radiation source based on attribute reduction-improved TOPSIS[J]. Electronics Optics & Control, 2023, 30(6):22-29. (in Chinese)
[4]	YIN Y F, ZHANG R T, SU Q R. Threat assessment of aerial targets based on improved GRA-TOPSIS method and three-way decisions[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7):13250-13266. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023591 pmid: 37501487
[5]	ZANG D M, SHENG X L, WANG L Y, et al. Research and application of warship multi-attribute threat assessment based on improved TOPSIS gray association analysis[J]. International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics, 2022, 14(3):1-14.
[6]	孙海文, 于邵祯, 江源, 等. 海上无人机蜂群目标威胁评估方法[J]. 兵工学报, 2022, 43(增刊2):32-39.
	SUN H W, YU S Z, JIANG Y, et al. Target threat assessment method for UAV swarm at sea[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2022, 43(S2):32-39. (in Chinese) doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2022.B006
[7]	LUO R N, HUANG S C, ZHAO Y F, et al. Threat assessment method of low altitude slow small (LSS) targets based on information entropy and AHP[J]. Entropy, 2021, 23(10):1292.
[8]	陈东锋, 雷英杰. 空袭目标威胁程度的综合评估与排序模型[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2005, 27(9):1597-1599.
	CHEN D F, LEI Y J. Synthetic evaluation and sorting of the air targets threat[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2005, 27(9):1597-1599. (in Chinese)
[9]	黄力伟, 穆杨. 基于主成分分析法的护航行动海面目标威胁评估[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2018, 43(8):147-150,155.
	HUANG L W, MU Y. Assessment of sea sur face target menace during escort operation based on principal components analysis[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2018, 43(8):147-150,155. (in Chinese)
[10]	朱胜伟, 周德云, 李兆强. 基于改进的主成分分析法的目标威胁评估[J]. 计算机仿真, 2010, 27(3):1-4.
	ZHU S W, ZHOU D Y, LI Z Q. Object threat evaluation based on improved principal components analysis[J]. Computer Simulation, 2010, 27(3):1-4. (in Chinese)
[11]	李一夫, 宋贵宝, 贾汝娜, 等. 联合防空任务下舰艇编队威胁评估方法[J]. 现代防御技术, 2019, 47(3):15-25.
	LI Y F, SONG G B, JIA R N, et al. Threat assessment method of ship formation under joint air defense mission[J]. Modern Defence Technology, 2019, 47(3):15-25. (in Chinese)
[12]	MA S D, ZHANG H Z, YANG G Q. Target threat level assessment based on cloud model under fuzzy and uncertain conditions in air combat simulation[J]. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2017, 67:49-53.
[13]	徐浩, 邢清华, 王伟, 等. 基于改进结构熵权法的目标威胁灰色综合评估[J]. 信息工程大学学报, 2016, 17(5):620-625.
	XU H, XING Q H, WANG W, et al. threat assessment based on improved structure entropy and gray theory[J]. Journal of Information Engineering University, 2016, 17(5):620-625. (in Chinese)
[14]	王志勇, 冯杰. 基于灰色聚类的海上目标威胁等级评估[J]. 四川兵工学报, 2009, 30(3):46-49.
	WANG Z Y, FENG J. Threat level assessment of maritime targets based on grey clustering[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment Engineering, 2009, 30(3):46-49. (in Chinese)
[15]	ZHANG J H, SHAN Y J, DONG J. A threat assessment method based on correlation-similarity information and three-way decisions in interval intuitionistic fuzzy environment[J]. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2024, 135:108793.
[16]	李伟湋, 高培雪, 陈进, 等. 基于累积前景理论和三支决策的无人机态势评估[J]. 上海交通大学学报, 2022, 56(11):1479-1490. doi: 10.16183/j.cnki.jsjtu.2021.400
	LI W W, GAO P X, CHEN J, et al. Unmanned aerial vehicle situation assessment based on cumulative prospect theory and three-way decision[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2022, 56(11):1479-1490. (in Chinese)
[17]	靳崇, 孙娟, 王永佳, 等. 基于直觉模糊TOPSIS和变权VIKOR的防空目标威胁综合评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(1):172-180. doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2022.01.22
	JIN C, SUN J, WANG Y J, et al. Threat comprehensive assessment for air defense targets based on intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSlS and variable weight VIKOR[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44(1):172-180. (in Chinese)
[18]	向崇文, 姜青山, 杨辉. 海上电子战目标威胁分析与评估[J]. 现代防御技术, 2016, 44(6):148-154.
	XIANG C W, JIANG Q S, YANG H. Threat analysis and assessment of maritime electronic warfare target[J]. Modern Defence Technology, 2016, 44(6):148-154. (in Chinese)
[19]	黄钦龙, 刘忠, 夏家伟. 海上近岸目标威胁评估模型[J]. 指挥控制与仿真, 2019, 41(5):21-26. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-3819.2019.05.005
	HUANG Q L, LIU Z, XIA J W. Threat assessment model of near-shore targets[J]. Command Control & Simulation, 2019, 41(5):21-26. (in Chinese)
[20]	舒健生, 赖晓昌, 李亚雄, 等. 基于APSO和FCM的海上移动目标威胁等级评估模型[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2023, 48(8):74-80.
	SHU J S, LAI X C, LI Y X, et al. Threat level evaluation model of moving targets at sea based on APSO and FCM[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2023, 48(8):74-80. (in Chinese)
[21]	彭耿, 郭伟民, 卢湛夷. 冷战后美国航母编队基本编成发展历程[J]. 国防科技, 2023, 44(4):62-67.
	PENG G, GUO W M, LU Z Y. Development of the basic formation of the U.S.carrier fleet after the cold war[J]. National Defense Technology, 2023, 44(4):62-67. (in Chinese)
[22]	郭琳琳, 彭芃, 张建英. 美国航空母舰编队作战能力分析[J]. 雷达与对抗, 2017, 37(3):17-23,34.
	GUO L L, PENG P, ZHANG J Y. Analysis on combat capability of American carrier strike groups[J]. Radar & Electronic Countermeasures, 2017, 37(3):17-23,34. (in Chinese)
[23]	ATANASSOV K T, STOEVA S. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets[J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1986, 20(1):87-96.
[24]	WU J Z, ZHANG Q. Multicriteria decision making method based on intuitionistic fuzzy weighted entropy[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2011, 38(1):916-922.
[25]	谭学瑞, 邓聚龙. 灰色关联分析:多因素统计分析新方法[J]. 统计研究, 1995(3):46-48.
	TAN X R, DENG J L. Gray correlation analysis:a new approach to multifactor statistical analysis[J]. Statistical Research, 1995(3):46-48. (in Chinese)
[26]	李海燕, 柳强, 徐建忠, 等. 气象海洋环境对航母编队反潜作战影响仿真模型设计研究[J]. 舰船电子工程, 2023, 43(7):84-88.
	LI H Y, LIU Q, XU J Z, et al. Research on simulation model design of marine environmental impact on anti-submarine warfare of aircraft carrier formation[J]. Ship Electronic Engineering, 2023, 43(7):84-88. (in Chinese)
[27]	李德鑫, 陈曦, 潘龙, 等. 海洋环境雷达探测效能评估系统设计[J]. 电子测量技术, 2017, 40(7):80-84.
	LI D X, CHEN X, PAN L, et al. Design of effectiveness evaluation system for radar detection in marine environment[J]. Electronic Measurement Technology, 2017, 40(7):80-84. (in Chinese)
[28]	武华, 苏秀琴. 基于群广义直觉模糊软集的空袭目标威胁评估方法[J]. 控制与决策, 2015, 30(8):1462-1468.
	WU H, SU X Q. Threat assessment of aerial targets based on group generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets[J]. Control and Decision, 2015, 30(8):1462-1468. (in Chinese)
[29]	周小强, 李庆国. 广义直觉模糊软集的格结构[J]. 湖南大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 41(3):113-116.
	ZHOU X Q, LI Q G. Lattice structures of generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets[J]. Journal of Hunan University (Natural Sciences), 2014, 41(3):113-116. (in Chinese)
[30]	高建伟, 郭奉佳. 基于改进前景理论的直觉模糊随机多准则决策方法[J]. 控制与决策, 2019, 34(2):317-324.
	GAO J W, GUO F J. Intuitionistic fuzzy stochastic multi-criteria decision-making method based on modified prospect theory[J]. Control and Decision, 2019, 34(2):317-324. (in Chinese)
[31]	沈进昌, 杜树新, 罗祎, 等. 基于云模型的模糊综合评价方法及应用[J]. 模糊系统与数学, 2012, 26(6):115-123.
	SHEN J C, DU S X, LUO Y, et al. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method based on cloud model and its application[J]. Fuzzy Systems and Mathematics, 2012, 26(6):115-123. (in Chinese)
[32]	YAN W Z, NIU J, SU H Y. A study on program evaluation and review technology based on cloud model[C]// Proceedings of 2007 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. Singapore: IEEE, 2007:1047-1052.

不确定程度	犹豫度计算参数p
很不确定	0.8
不确定	0.65
一般	0.5
确定	0.3
很确定	0.1

不确定程度	犹豫度计算参数p
很不确定	0.8
不确定	0.65
一般	0.5
确定	0.3
很确定	0.1

编号	C₁₁	C₁₂	C₃₁	C₅₃	C₆₂	相对距离/km
1	航母 (很确定)	完好 (确定)	强 (确定)	较快 (确定)	强 (很确定)	[302,344]
2	航母 (很确定)	完好 (确定)	强 (确定)	快 (确定)	强 (确定)	[311,350]
3	驱逐 (很确定)	完好 (确定)	较强 (很确定)	中等 (一般)	中等 (很确定)	[353,388]
4	驱逐 (确定)	良好 (很确定)	较强 (不确定)	中等 (确定)	较强 (一般)	[345,380]
5	护卫 (一般)	轻伤 (确定)	中等 (确定)	中等 (很确定)	中等 (很确定)	[336,378]
6	护卫 (确定)	轻伤 (很确定)	较强 (不确定)	较慢 (确定)	较弱 (确定)	[290,331]
7	护卫 (不确定)	良好 (确定)	中等 (确定)	较慢 (确定)	较弱 (确定)	[404,442]
8	护卫 (一般)	完好 (一般)	较弱 (一般)	较慢 (很确定)	中等 (很确定)	[410,453]
9	护卫 (确定)	轻伤 (一般)	中等 (确定)	中等 (不确定)	较弱 (一般)	[387,424]

编号	C₁₁	C₁₂	C₃₁	C₅₃	C₆₂	相对距离/km
1	航母 (很确定)	完好 (确定)	强 (确定)	较快 (确定)	强 (很确定)	[302,344]
2	航母 (很确定)	完好 (确定)	强 (确定)	快 (确定)	强 (确定)	[311,350]
3	驱逐 (很确定)	完好 (确定)	较强 (很确定)	中等 (一般)	中等 (很确定)	[353,388]
4	驱逐 (确定)	良好 (很确定)	较强 (不确定)	中等 (确定)	较强 (一般)	[345,380]
5	护卫 (一般)	轻伤 (确定)	中等 (确定)	中等 (很确定)	中等 (很确定)	[336,378]
6	护卫 (确定)	轻伤 (很确定)	较强 (不确定)	较慢 (确定)	较弱 (确定)	[290,331]
7	护卫 (不确定)	良好 (确定)	中等 (确定)	较慢 (确定)	较弱 (确定)	[404,442]
8	护卫 (一般)	完好 (一般)	较弱 (一般)	较慢 (很确定)	中等 (很确定)	[410,453]
9	护卫 (确定)	轻伤 (一般)	中等 (确定)	中等 (不确定)	较弱 (一般)	[387,424]

目标	舰船价值	侦察能力	指控能力	打击能力	电子战能力	拦截能力
T1	<0.900,0.084>	<0.862,0.031>	<0.887,0.053>	<0.848,0.050>	<0.748,0.121>	<0.882,0.046>
T2	<0.900,0.084>	<0.847,0.054>	<0.883,0.064>	<0.824,0.074>	<0.786,0.122>	<0.874,0.058>
T3	<0.772,0.193>	<0.763,0.159>	<0.717,0.227>	<0.749,0.173>	<0.616,0.263>	<0.679,0.236>
T4	<0.700,0.224>	<0.781,0.140>	<0.725,0.117>	<0.766,0.154>	<0.633,0.262>	<0.751,0.140>
T5	<0.666,0.167>	<0.785,0.118>	<0.619,0.240>	<0.771,0.134>	<0.638,0.252>	<0.699,0.195>
T6	<0.500,0.373>	<0.896,0.010>	<0.638,0.080>	<0.877,0.010>	<0.739,0.022>	<0.782,0.047>
T7	<0.560,0.183>	<0.644,0.272>	<0.557,0.328>	<0.629,0.287>	<0.496,0.415>	<0.553,0.346>
T8	<0.666,0.182>	<0.620,0.285>	<0.439,0.332>	<0.605,0.300>	<0.479,0.445>	<0.597,0.341>
T9	<0.560,0.283>	<0.684,0.234>	<0.570,0.312>	<0.669,0.249>	<0.554,0.309>	<0.575,0.277>