Bounded Rationality Decision-making Mode of Warship Formation Operational Command Based on Dual-process Theory

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2024.0384

Abstract

Abstract:

Operational command decision-making is the core content of joint combat activities and the key to the success of joint combat action. The paper aims to fundamentally solve the problem about “weak command and decision-making ability of combined formation” from the perspective of cognitive psychology. Based on the systematic analysis of formation operational command decision-making, the bounded rationality decision-making is scientifically mapped from the perspective of dual-process theory. A function model of bounded rationality decision-making is constructed, the types of bounded rationality decision-making are divided, and the cognitive deviation of bounded rationality decision-making is identified. An intelligent hybrid decision-making framework is proposed for warship formation operational command. The strategy of enhancing the bounded rationality decision-making ability of formation operational command is formed. The results show that the research framework is scientific, effective and intelligent, and can greatly improve the commander’s operational decision-making ability. It provides strong theoretical and technical support for the development of the next generation auxiliary decision support system.

Key words: warship formation, bounded rationality, operational command decision-making, dual-process theory, cognitive bias

CLC Number:

TP391.9

NIE Junfeng, CHEN Xingjun, SUN Dongpu. Bounded Rationality Decision-making Mode of Warship Formation Operational Command Based on Dual-process Theory[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2025, 46(5): 240384-.

Figures/Tables 6

References 27

[1]	聂俊峰, 陈行军, 史红权. 面向任务驱动的海上编队云作战体系动态超网络模型[J]. 兵工学报, 2021, 42(11): 2513-2521. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2021.11.024
	NIE J F, CHEN X J, SHI H Q. Dynamic super-network model of task-oriented naval fleet “cloud combat” system[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2021, 42(11): 2513-2521. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2021.11.024
[2]	张晓龙, 史同波, 张彦忠. 把握联合作战决策内在要求[N]. 解放军报, 2021-03-25( 7).
	ZHANG X L, SHI T B, ZHANG Y Z. Grasp the inherent requirements of joint operational decision-making[N]. PLA Daily, 2021-03-25( 7). (in Chinese)
[3]	杨静, 陆铭华, 郭力强, 等. 不确定环境下潜艇综合防御鱼雷的作战决策分析与优化方法[J]. 兵工学报, 2024, 45(2): 564-573. doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2022.0651
	YANG J, LU M H, GUO L Q, et al. Operational decision analysis and optimization method of submarine integrate defense against torpedo in uncertain environment[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2024, 45(2): 564-573. (in Chinese) doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2022.0651
[4]	EDWARDS W. The theory of decision making[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 1954, 51(4): 380-417. doi: 10.1037/h0053870 pmid: 13177802
[5]	胡振震, 袁唯淋, 罗俊仁, 等. 面向多最优解组合优化问题的决策求解算法[J]. 国防科技大学学报, 2022, 44(3): 31-40.
	HU Z Z, YUAN W L, LUO J R, et al. Decision solving algorithm for multiple optimal solution combinatorial optimization problem[J]. Journal of National University of Defense Technology, 2022, 44(3): 31-40. (in Chinese)
[6]	SIMON H A, HAYES J R. Understanding process: problem isomorphs[J]. Cognitive Psychology, 1976(8): 165-190.
[7]	WIERZBICKI A P. On the role of intuition in decision making and some ways of mufticriteria aid of intuition[J] .Mufticriteria Decision Analysis, 1997, 6(2):65-76.
[8]	KAHNEMAN D, KLEIN G. Conditions for intuitive expertise: a failure to disagree[J]. The American Psychologist, 2009, 64: 515-526.
[9]	万涛, 大月博司. 科技创新团队成员有限理性下的过程冲突博弈研究[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2018, 38(10): 2629-2637. doi: 10.12011/1000-6788(2018)10-2629-09
	WAN T, HIROSHI O. Game research on process conflicts under the bounded rationality of science and technology innovation team members[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2018, 38(10): 2629-2637. (in Chinese)
[10]	桑惠云, 谢新连, 王宝义. 基于有限理性的船型方案优选[J]. 大连海事大学学报, 2019, 45(2): 58-64.
	SANG H Y, XIE X L, WANG B Y. Ship scheme selection based on decision maker’s limited rationality[J]. Journal of Dalian Maritime University, 2019, 45(2): 58-64. (in Chinese)
[11]	赵利强, 郭梦倩, 唐水雄, 等. 基于有限理性约束的自适应人群疏散仿真模型[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2022, 34(10): 2162-2170. doi: 10.16182/j.issn1004731x.joss.21-0472
	ZHAO L Q, GUO M Q, TANG S X, et al. Adaptive crowd evacuation simulation model based on bounded rationality constraints[J]. Journal of System Simulation, 2022, 34(10): 2162-2170. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16182/j.issn1004731x.joss.21-0472
[12]	冯文刚, 张与玮, 何晓春. 有限理性下民航安保参与方策略演化博弈分析[J]. 合肥工业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 44(9): 1279-1286.
	FENG W G, ZHANG Y W, HE X C. Evolutionary game analysis strategies of civil aviation security participant sunder bounded rationality[J]. Journal of Hefei University of Technology(Natural Science), 2021, 44(9): 1279-1286. (in Chinese)
[13]	EVANS J S. Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 2008, 59:225-278.
[14]	HOGARTH R M. On the learning of intuition[M]. New York, NY, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2008.
[15]	KAHNEMAN D. Maps of bounded rationality: psychology for behavioral economics[J]. American Economic Review, 2003, 93(5):1449-1475.
[16]	王伟, 胡丹. 基于自然决策的舰艇编队作战计划生成技术框架研究[J]. 舰船电子工程, 2021, 41(9): 6-10.
	WANG W, HU D. Research on the technical framework of generating warship formation combat plan based on natural decision making[J]. Ship Electronic Engineering, 2021, 41(9): 6-10. (in Chinese)
[17]	SIMON H A. A behavioral model of rational choice[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1955, 69: 99-118.
[18]	THALER R H, SHEFRIN H M. The behavioral life cycle hypothesis[J]. Economic Inquiry, 1988, 26(4): 609-643.
[19]	EVA J, STEFAN S H, DIETER F, et al. Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: an expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, 80(4): 557-571. pmid: 11316221
[20]	晋欣泉, 姜强, 梁芮, 等. 深度学习视域下认知偏差对知识建构的影响机制研究[J]. 电化教育研究, 2021(7): 75-82.
	JIN X Q, JIANG Q, LIANG R, et al. A study on influencing mechanism of cognitive bias on knowledge construction for deep learning[J]. e-Education Research, 2021 (7): 75-82. (in Chinese)
[21]	田志刚, 卢兴华, 宋一中. 关于直觉决策几个问题的研究[C]// 中国系统工程学会决策科学专业委员会第四届学术年会论文集, 苏州: 中国系统工程学会, 2001: 252-258.
	TIAN Z G, LU X H, SONG Y Z. Research on several issues of intuitive decision making[C]// Proceedings of the 4th Academic Annual Conference of the Decision Science Professional Committee of the Chinese Society of Systems Engineering, Suzhou: Systems Engineering Society of China, 2001: 252-258. (in Chinese)
[22]	唐传林, 黄长强, 丁达理, 等. 一种UCAV自主空战智能战术决策方法[J]. 指挥控制与仿真, 2015, 37(5): 5-10.
	TANG C L, HUANG C Q, DING D L, et al. A method of intelligent tactical decision making for UCAV autonomous air combat[J]. Command Control & Simulation, 2015, 37(5): 5-10. (in Chinese)
[23]	贺筱媛, 郭圣明, 吴琳, 等. 面向智能化兵棋的认知行为建模方法研究[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2021, 33(9): 2037-2047. doi: 10.16182/j.issn1004731x.joss.21-0727
	HE X Y, GUO S M, WU L, et al. Modeling research of cognition behavior for intelligent wargaming[J]. Journal of System Simulation, 2021, 33(9): 2037-2047. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16182/j.issn1004731x.joss.21-0727
[24]	丁梦远, 兰旭光, 彭茹, 等. 机器推理的进展与展望[J]. 模式识别与人工智能, 2021, 34(1): 1-13. doi: 10.16451/j.cnki.issn1003-6059.202101001
	DING M Y, LAN X G, PENG R, et al. Progress and prospect of machine reasoning[J]. Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 2021, 34(1): 1-13. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16451/j.cnki.issn1003-6059.202101001
[25]	吴桐, 于广平, 袁德成, 等. 基于案例推理的曝气过程智能控制方法[J]. 控制工程, 2023, 30(11): 2041-2047.
	WU T, YU G P, YUAN D C, et al. Intelligent control method of aeration process based on case-based reasoning[J]. Control Engineering of China, 2023, 30(11): 2041-2047. (in Chinese)
[26]	万斯来, 王国新, 明振军, 等. 基于知识推理的杀伤网智能设计方法[J]. 兵工学报, 2024, 45(4): 1025-1037. doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2022.1077
	WAN S L, WANG G X, MING Z J, et al. Knowledge reasoning-based intelligent design method of kill-web[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2024, 45(4): 1025-1037. (in Chinese) doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2022.1077
[27]	LIEBERMAN M D. Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 2007, 58: 259-289. pmid: 17002553

决策类型	C		D	F
决策类型	问题不确定性程度	时间紧迫程度	D	F
灵感型决策	非常高	非常高	弱	强
调整型决策	高	非常高	强	强
借鉴型决策	较高	高	强	弱
复制型决策	较弱	较弱	强	弱

决策类型	C		D	F
决策类型	问题不确定性程度	时间紧迫程度	D	F
灵感型决策	非常高	非常高	弱	强
调整型决策	高	非常高	强	强
借鉴型决策	较高	高	强	弱
复制型决策	较弱	较弱	强	弱

决策能力增强机制	对应决策类型	具体描述	主导系统	决策目标
机制1	灵感型决策	模拟指挥员采用直觉推理的方式生成创造性解决方案的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,若评估结果不理想则选择其他方案	系统1	满意
机制2	调整型决策	模拟指挥员采用案例推理的方式检索出作战方案并进行适应性改进的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,若评估结果不理想则选择其他方案	系统1	满意
机制3	借鉴型决策	模拟指挥员采用案例推理的方式检索出作战方案并进行适应性改进的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,若评估结果不理想则采用规则推理再次进行方案优化	系统1	满意
机制4	复制型决策	模拟指挥员充分利用案例推理和规则推理的方式生成方案预案的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,反复完善形成最终方案	系统1+系统2	最优

决策能力增强机制	对应决策类型	具体描述	主导系统	决策目标
机制1	灵感型决策	模拟指挥员采用直觉推理的方式生成创造性解决方案的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,若评估结果不理想则选择其他方案	系统1	满意
机制2	调整型决策	模拟指挥员采用案例推理的方式检索出作战方案并进行适应性改进的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,若评估结果不理想则选择其他方案	系统1	满意
机制3	借鉴型决策	模拟指挥员采用案例推理的方式检索出作战方案并进行适应性改进的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,若评估结果不理想则采用规则推理再次进行方案优化	系统1	满意
机制4	复制型决策	模拟指挥员充分利用案例推理和规则推理的方式生成方案预案的过程,并通过头脑推演对方案进行可行性评估,反复完善形成最终方案	系统1+系统2	最优

任务阶段	情景描述	决策类型	偏差类型	增强机制
CT₁	进行战前预先筹划,生成作战计划	复制型决策	反应不足偏差、安于现状偏差	机制4
CT₂	对区域内不同范围空中来袭目标实施搜索、监视,实时获取目标情报信息	借鉴型决策	框架偏差	机制3
CT₃	在远程拦截区对空中来袭目标进行截击	调整型决策	锚定效应偏差、过分自信偏差	机制2
CT₄	空中来袭目标突破远程防空区后,即转入区域拦截	调整型决策	锚定效应偏差、过分自信偏差	机制2
CT₅	当区域防空群拦截失败后,空中来袭目标飞向编队近程防御圈,组织近程防空反导	调整型决策	锚定效应偏差、过分自信偏差	机制2
CT₆	末端防御的目标主要是突破远中近程防御圈的敌空袭兵力	灵感型决策	易得性直觉偏差	机制1
CT₇	将打击结果实时反馈至主动辅助决策节点,有序组织打击效果评估和作战能力恢复	借鉴型决策	框架偏差	机制3