An Optimized Threat Assessment Method for Aerial Target Groups

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2024.0891

Abstract

Abstract:

The threat assessment method based on multi-contribute decision-making for aerial target groups is optimized to reflect the characteristics of target groups and improve the confidence of threat assessment.The threat assessment method and model for aerial target groups are established for the requirement of information compression of target groups.Then a dynamic intuition blur multi-contribute decision-making threat assessment method proposed in the paper is used to evaluate the combat abilities and threat level of aerial target groups.The dynamic intuition blur multi-contribute decision-making method is successfully used for threat assessment.Simulated results indicate that the dynamic intuition blur multi-contribute decision-making method enlarge the time dimension of multi-contribute decision-making method.It not only applies to the multi-contribute decision-making of single period of time,but also the multi-contribute decision-making of multi periods of time.

Key words: command-decision-making, information fusion, threat assessment of target groups, multi-attributes decision-making

TENG Zhe, LI Ye, QIU Qianjun. An Optimized Threat Assessment Method for Aerial Target Groups[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2024, 45(S2): 105-112.

Figures/Tables 7

References 18

[1]	曲长文, 何友, 马强. 应用多属性决策的威胁评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2000, 22(5):26-28.
	QU C W, HE Y, MA Q. Threat assessment using multiple attribute decision making[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2000, 22(5):26-28. (in Chinese)
[2]	QU C W, HE Y. A method of threat assessment using multiple attribute decision making[C]// Processing of the 6th International Conference on Signal Proceeding. Beijing,China: IEEE, 2002:1091-1095.
[3]	王小艺, 刘载文, 侯朝桢, 等. 基于模糊多属性决策的目标威胁估计方法[J]. 控制与决策, 2007, 22(8):859-863.
	WANG X Y, LIU Z W, HOU C Z, et al. Method of object threat assessment based on fuzzy MADM[J]. Control and Decision, 2007, 22(8):859-863. (in Chinese)
[4]	程明, 周德云, 张堃. 基于混合型多属性决策方法的目标威胁评估[J]. 电光与控制, 2010, 17(1):11-13.
	CHENG M, ZHOU D Y, ZHANG K. Threat assessment of target based on a hybrid multi-attribute decision-making method[J]. Electronic Optics & Control, 2010, 17(1):11-13. (in Chinese)
[5]	王毅, 刘三阳, 张文, 等. 属性权重不确定的直觉模糊多属性决策的威胁评估方法[J]. 电子学报, 2014, 42(12):2509-2514. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0372-2112.2014.12.025
	WANG Y, LIU S Y, ZHANG W, et al. Threat assessment method with uncertain attribute weight based on intuitionistic fuzzy multi-attribute decision[J]. Acta Electronica Sonica, 2014, 42(12):2509-2514. (in Chinese)
[6]	郭辉, 徐浩军, 刘凌. 基于区间数 TOPSIS 法的空战目标威胁评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2009, 31(12):2914-2917.
	GUO H, XU H J, LIU L. Threat assessment for air combat target based on interval TOPSIS[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2009, 31(12):2914-2917. (in Chinese)
[7]	杨远志, 王红卫, 索中英, 等. 基于粗糙集-逼近理想解排序的辐射源威胁排序方法[J]. 兵工学报, 2016, 37(5):945-952. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2016.05.024
	YANG Y Z, WANG H W, SUO Z Y, et al. An emitter threat evaluation method based on rough set and TOPSIS[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2016, 37(5):945-952. (in Chinese)
[8]	张浩为, 谢军伟, 葛佳昂, 等. 改进TOPSIS的多态融合直觉模糊威胁评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2018, 40(10):2263-2269.
	ZHANG H W, XIE J W, GE J A, et al. Intuitionistic fuzzy set threat assessment based on improved TOPSIS and multiple times fusion[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2018, 40(10):2263-2269. (in Chinese)
[9]	申卯兴, 许进, 王帅. 空中目标威胁排序的灰色聚类决策方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2008, 30(9):1721-1723.
	SHEN M X, XU J, WANG S. Grey cluster decision making way for the threat ordering of aerial targets[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2008, 30(9):1721-1723. (in Chinese)
[10]	李特, 冯琦, 张堃. 基于熵权灰色关联和D-S证据理论的威胁评估[J]. 计算机应用研究, 2013, 30(2):380-382.
	LI T, FENG Q, ZHANG K. Threat assessment based on entropy weight grey incidence and D-S theory of evidence[J]. Application research of Computers, 2013, 30(2):380-382. (in Chinese)
[11]	夏春林, 周德云, 冯琦. 基于变权灰色关联法的目标威胁评估[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2014, 39(4):54-57.
	XIA C L, ZHOU D Y, FENG Q. Target threat assessment based on the method of variable weight grey incidence[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2014, 39(4):54-57. (in Chinese)
[12]	刘海波, 王和平, 沈立顶. 基于SAPSO优化灰色神经网络的空中目标威胁估计[J]. 西北工业大学学报, 2016, 34(1):25-32.
	LIU H B, WANG H P, SHEN L X. Target threat assessment using SAPSO and grey neural network[J]. Journal of Northwestern Polytechnic University, 2016, 34(1):25-32. (in Chinese)
[13]	张力, 陈伟, 刘志坚, 等. 基于综合威胁和 MADM 的超视距威胁评估研究[J]. 数学的实践与认识, 2017, 47(19):111-118.
	ZHANG L, CHEN W, LIU Z J, et al. Research on over-the-horizon threat assessment based on comprehensive threat and MADM[J]. Mathematics in Practice and Theory, 2017, 47(19):111-118. (in Chinese)
[14]	董彦非, 郭基联, 张恒喜. 多机空战目标威胁评估算法[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2002, 27(4):73-75.
	DONG Y F, GUO J L, ZHANG H X. Threat assessment for multi-aircraft-air combat[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2002, 27(4):73-75. (in Chinese)
[15]	高永, 向锦武. 超视距多机协同空战目标分配算法[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2007, 33(3):286-289.
	GAO Y, XIANG J W. Target assignment in BVR air combat[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2007, 33(3):286-289. (in Chinese)
[16]	陈强, 周先雁. 岩锚梁稳定性影响因素模糊灰色关联分析模型及其应用[J]. 中南大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 46(9):3487-3495.
	CHEN Q, ZHOU X Y. Fuzzy grey relation analysis model on influence factors for stability of rock-bolt crane girder and its application[J]. Journal of Central South University (Science and Technology), 2015, 46(9):3487-3495. (in Chinese)
[17]	于亮, 方志耕, 吴利丰, 等. 基于灰色类别差异特性的评价指标客观权重极大熵配置模型[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2014, 34(8):2065-2070. doi: 10.12011/1000-6788(2014)8-2065
	YU L, FANG Z G, WU L F, et al. Maximum entropy configuration model of objective index weight based on grey category characteristics difference[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2014, 34(8):2065-2070. (in Chinese)
[18]	闫书丽, 刘思峰, 方志耕, 等. 区间灰数群决策中决策者和属性权重确定方法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2014, 34(9):2372-2378. doi: 10.12011/1000-6788(2014)9-2372
	YAN S L, LIU S F, FANG Z G, et al. Method of determining weights of decision makers and attributes for group decision making with interval grey numbers[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2014, 34(9):2372-2378. (in Chinese)

批号	距离/km	Ma	高度/km	进攻角/(°)	重复频率/kHz	脉宽/μs	载频/GHz	群类型/群内目标数量
A₁	150	2.0	2	45	15	8	10	战斗机/1
A₂	200	1.2	1.5	-30	1.25	8	6	攻击机/1
A₃	50	0.7	0.5	1	2	8	16	反舰导弹/2
A₄	180	1.8	3	120	15	8	10	战斗机/3
A₅	350	0.6	5	10	0.3	8	3	预警机/1

批号	距离/km	Ma	高度/km	进攻角/(°)	重复频率/kHz	脉宽/μs	载频/GHz	群类型/群内目标数量
A₁	150	2.0	2	45	15	8	10	战斗机/1
A₂	200	1.2	1.5	-30	1.25	8	6	攻击机/1
A₃	50	0.7	0.5	1	2	8	16	反舰导弹/2
A₄	180	1.8	3	120	15	8	10	战斗机/3
A₅	350	0.6	5	10	0.3	8	3	预警机/1

群批号	距离威胁	速度威胁	高度威胁	进攻角威胁	抗干扰威胁	重频威胁	脉宽威胁	载频威胁	类型威胁	相对接近度值
A₁	0.450	1	0.861	0.119	0.9	0.4453	0.4879	0.3247	0.5	0.688
A₂	0.200	1	0.963	0.388	0.9	0.2647	0.4879	0.1948	0.6	0.294
A₃	0.954	0.5	1	0.999	0.5	0.4206	0.4879	0.3247	0.9	0.916
A₄	0.288	1	0.549	0	0.9	0.4453	0.4879	0.3247	0.7	0.458
A₅	0	0	0.091	0.900	0.7	0	0.4879	0.1948	0.2	0.081

群批号	距离威胁	速度威胁	高度威胁	进攻角威胁	抗干扰威胁	重频威胁	脉宽威胁	载频威胁	类型威胁	相对接近度值
A₁	0.450	1	0.861	0.119	0.9	0.4453	0.4879	0.3247	0.5	0.688
A₂	0.200	1	0.963	0.388	0.9	0.2647	0.4879	0.1948	0.6	0.294
A₃	0.954	0.5	1	0.999	0.5	0.4206	0.4879	0.3247	0.9	0.916
A₄	0.288	1	0.549	0	0.9	0.4453	0.4879	0.3247	0.7	0.458
A₅	0	0	0.091	0.900	0.7	0	0.4879	0.1948	0.2	0.081

方案	c₁	c₂	c₃
A₁	(0.7,0.2,0.1)	(0.9,0.1,0.0)	(0.8,0.1,0.1)
A₂	(0.5,0.1,0.4)	(0.3,0.1,0.6)	(0.2,0.7,0.1)
A₃	(0.6,0.2,0.2)	(0.5,0.2,0.3)	(0.9,0.1,0.0)
A₄	(0.8,0.1,0.1)	(0.7,0.1,0.2)	(0.4,0.5,0.1)
A₅	(0.6,0.3,0.1)	(0.6,0.2,0.2)	(0.7,0.1,0.2)