Multi-stage attack weapon target allocation method based on defense area analysis

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2020.000033

Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics ›› 2020, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (3): 539-550.doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2020.000033

• Systems Engineering • Previous Articles Next Articles

Multi-stage attack weapon target allocation method based on defense area analysis

Zhengrong JIA^1,²(), Faxing LU²(), Hangyu WANG^2,*()

¹ National Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on Vessel Integrated Power System, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan 430033, China
² College of Weaponry Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan 430033, China

Received:2019-07-26 Online:2020-06-30 Published:2020-06-30
Contact: Hangyu WANG E-mail:15527396914@sina.cn;lfx1974@163.com;wanghangyu@163.com
About author:JIA Zhengrong was born in 1992. He received his B.S. degree in command and control engineering from Naval University of Engineering in 2014, M.S. degree in systems engineering from Naval University of Engineering in 2016, and Ph.D. degree in systems engineering from Naval University of Engineering in 2019. He has worked in National Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on Vessel Integrated Power System since 2019. His current research interests include combat system effectiveness analysis and command and control. E-mail: 15527396914@sina.cn|LU Faxing was born in 1974. He received his B.S. degree in mine and anti-mine from Naval University of Engineering in 1997, M.S. degree in systems engineering from Naval University of Engineering in 2000, and Ph.D. degree in weapon and military technology, military applications and systems from Kuznetsov Naval Academy, Russia in 2008. He is now a professor at Naval University of Engineering. His current research interests include advanced weapon control and multi-agent cooperative control. E-mail: lfx1974@163.com|WANG Hangyu was born in 1965. He received his B.S. degree in military command from PLA Army Academy of Artillery and Air Defense in 1988, M.S. degree in fire control system from Naval University of Engineering in 1994, and Ph.D. degree in weapon system and application engineering from Naval University of Engineering in 2004. He is now a professor at Naval University of Engineering. His current research interests include combat system effectiveness analysis and multi-agent cooperative control. E-mail: wanghangyu@163.com
Supported by:
the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41871376);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41971416);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41631072);This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41871376; 41971416; 41631072)

Abstract

Abstract:

For better reflecting the interactive defense between targets in practical combat scenarios, the basic weapon-target allocation (WTA) framework needs to be improved. A multi-stage attack WTA method is proposed. First, a defense area analysis is presented according to the targets' positions and the radii of the defense areas to analyze the interactive coverage and protection between targets' defense areas. Second, with the coverage status and coverage layer number, a multi-stage attack planning method is proposed and the multi-stage attack objective function model is established. Simulation is conducted with interactive defense combat scenarios, the traditional WTA method and the multi-stage WTA method are compared, and the objective function model is validated with the Monte-Carlo method. The results suggest that if the combat scenario involves interactive coverage of targets' defense areas, it is imperative to analyze the defense areas and apply the multi-stage attack method to weakening the target defense progressively for better combat effectiveness.

Key words: weapon-target allocation (WTA), defense area analysis, combat effective analysis

Zhengrong JIA, Faxing LU, Hangyu WANG. Multi-stage attack weapon target allocation method based on defense area analysis[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(3): 539-550.

Figures/Tables 16

Fig 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig 2

Table 5

Fig 3

Table 6

Table 7

Fig 4

Fig 5

Fig 6

Fig 7

Table 8

Table 9

References 31

1	KARASAKAL O, ZDEMIREL N E, KANDILLER L. Anti-ship missile defense for a naval task group. Naval Research Logistics, 2011, 58 (3): 304- 321. doi: 10.1002/nav.20457
2	KORSAH G A, STENTZ A, DIAS M B. A comprehensive taxonomy for multi-robot task allocation. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 2013, 32 (12): 1495- 1512. doi: 10.1177/0278364913496484
3	LUO L, CHAKRABORTY N, SYCARA K. Provably-good distributed algorithm for constrained multi-robot task assignment for grouped tasks. IEEE Trans. on Robotics, 2015, 31 (1): 19- 30.
4	REZENDE M D, DE L, GUIMARES S. A greedy ant colony system for defensive resource assignment problems. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 2018, 32 (1/3): 138- 152.
5	HU X W, LUO P C, ZHANG X N, et al. Improved ant colony optimization for weapon-target assignment. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2018, 12, 1- 14.
6	LIU H, ZHANG P, HU B, et al. A novel approach to task assignment in a cooperative multi-agent design system. Applied Intelligence, 2015, 43 (1): 162- 175.
7	CHANG T Q, KONG D P, HAO N, et al. Solving the dynamic weapon target assignment problem by an improved artificial bee colony algorithm with heuristic factor initialization. Applied Soft Computing, 2018, 70, 845- 863. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2018.06.014
8	BLODGETT D E, GENDREAU M, GUERTIN F, et al. A tabu search heuristic for resource management in naval warfare. Journal of Heuristics, 2003, 9 (2): 145- 169. doi: 10.1023/A:1022525529778
9	LEBOUCHER C, SHIN H S, MÉNEC S L, et al. Optimal weapon target assignment based on an geometric approach. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2013, 46 (19): 341- 346. doi: 10.3182/20130902-5-DE-2040.00037
10	YAO Z X, LI M, CHEN Z J, et al. Mission decision-making method of multi-aircraft cooperatively attacking multi-target based on game theoretic framework. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2016, 29 (6): 1685- 1694. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2016.09.006
11	DAVIS M T, ROBBINS M J, LUNDAY B J. Approximate dynamic programming for missile defense interceptor fire control. European Journal of Operational Research, 2017, 259 (3): 873- 886. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.11.023
12	ZENG X P, ZHU Y L, NAN L, et al. Solving weapon-target assignment problem using discrete particle swarm optimization. Proc. of the World Congress on Intelligent Control & Automation, 2006, 1, 3562- 3565.
13	WANG Y, LI J, HUANG W L, et al. Dynamic weapon target assignment based on intuitionistic fuzzy entropy of discrete particle swarm. China Communications, 2017, 14 (1): 169- 179. doi: 10.1109/CC.2017.7839767
14	ŞAHIN M A, LEBLEBICIOǦLU K. Approximating the optimal mapping for weapon target assignment by fuzzy reasoning. Information Sciences, 2014, 255, 30- 44. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2013.08.004
15	ŞAHİN M A, LEBLEBİCIDOT K. Rule-based weapon target assignment on the battlefield. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2011, 44 (1): 13600- 13605. doi: 10.3182/20110828-6-IT-1002.01214
16	LI X T, YIN M H. An opposition-based differential evolution algorithm for permutation flow shop scheduling based on diversity measure. Advances in Engineering Software, 2013, 55 (1): 10- 31.
17	HAHN P M, KIM B J, GUIGNARD M, et al. An algorithm for the generalized quadratic assignment problem. Computational Optimization and Applications, 2008, 40 (3): 351- 372. doi: 10.1007/s10589-007-9093-1
18	LEE Z J, LEE C Y. A hybrid search algorithm with heuristics for resource allocation problem. Information Sciences, 2005, 173 (1/3): 155- 167.
19	XIN B, CHEN J, PENG Z H, et al. An efficient rule-based constructive heuristic to solve dynamic weapon-target assignment problem. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and CyberneticsjjPart A: Systems and Humans, 2011, 41 (3): 598- 606. doi: 10.1109/TSMCA.2010.2089511
20	ZHANG J Y, WANG X J, XU C Q, et al. ACGA algorithm of solving weapon-target assignment problem. Open Journal of Applied Sciences, 2012, 2 (4): 74- 77. doi: 10.4236/ojapps.2012.24B018
21	GUO D, LIANG Z X, JIANG P, et al. Weapon-target assignment for multi-to-multi interception with grouping constraint. IEEE Access, 2019, 7, 34838- 34849. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2898874
22	KLINE A G, AHNER D K, LUNDAY B J. Real-time heuristic algorithms for the static weapon target assignment problem. Journal of Heuristics, 2019, 25 (3): 377- 397. doi: 10.1007/s10732-018-9401-1
23	BASU M. Improved differential evolution for short-term hydrothermal scheduling. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2014, 58, 91- 100.
24	BAYRAK A E, POLAT F. Employment of an evolutionary heuristic to solve the target allocation problem efficiently. Information Sciences, 2013, 222, 675- 695. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2012.07.050
25	CHEN J, LI J, XIN B. DMOEA-$\varepsilon $C decomposition-based multiobjective evolutionary algorithm with the $\varepsilon $-constraint framework. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation, 2017, 21 (5): 714- 730.
26	ZHANG K, ZHOU D Y, YANG Z, et al. Constrained multi-objective weapon target assignment for area targets by efficient evolutionary algorithm. IEEE Access, 2019, 7, 176339- 176360. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2955482
27	DAS G P, MCGINNITY T M, COLEMAN S A, et al. A distributed task allocation algorithm for a multi-robot system in healthcare facilities. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 2015, 80 (1): 33- 58.
28	CAO M, FANG W G. Distributed MMAS for weapon target assignment based on Spark framework. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 2018, 35 (3): 3685- 3696.
29	LI N, HUAI W Q, WANG S D. The solution of target assignment problem in command and control decision-making behaviour simulation. Enterprise Information Systems, 2016, 11 (31): 1059- 1077.
30	CHI H P, LIU J X, CHEN Y W, et al. Survey of the research on dynamic weapon-target assigmnent problem. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2006, 17 (3): 559- 565. doi: 10.1016/S1004-4132(06)60097-2
31	BOUSSAID I, LEPAGNOT J, SIARRY P. A survey on optimization metaheuristics. Information Sciences, 2013, 237, 82- 117. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2013.02.041

Target	T-1	T-2	T-3	T-4	T-5	T-6	T-7	T-8
Value	18.67	20.30	6.29	20.44	15.38	5.76	53.01	35.84

Weapon	Target
Weapon	T-1	T-2	T-3	T-4	T-5	T-6	T-7	T-8
W-1	0.79	0.79	0.68	0.73	0.74	0.73	0.66	0.74
W-2	0.79	0.70	0.78	0.61	0.75	0.63	0.61	0.66
W-3	0.63	0.76	0.76	0.77	0.75	0.74	0.62	0.79
W-4	0.79	0.63	0.79	0.79	0.68	0.61	0.76	0.61

Weapon	Target
Weapon	T-1	T-2	T-3	T-4	T-5	T-6	T-7	T-8
W-1	0.28	0.17	0.38	0.36	0.48	0.40	0.46	0.16
W-2	0.25	0.30	0.40	0.17	0.24	0.20	0.48	0.20
W-3	0.41	0.28	0.21	0.15	0.33	0.30	0.32	0.44
W-4	0.42	0.36	0.37	0.30	0.19	0.38	0.16	0.20

Weapon	W-1	W-2	W-3	W-4
Target	T-8	T-1	T-4	T-7

Target	T-1	T-2	T-3	T-4	T-5	T-6	T-7	T-8	T-9	T-10	T-11	T-12	T-13	T-14	T-15	T-16	T-17	T-18
Value	20.46	14.83	21.97	14.99	18.95	8.29	39.46	41.18	41.37	43.41	40.44	35.41	64.13	53.05	64.76	35.44	33.17	14.69

Multi-stage attack weapon target allocation method based on defense area analysis

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

Share this article

Figures/Tables 16

References 31

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

Method	W-1	W-2	W-3	W-4	W-5	W-6	W-7	W-8	W-9	W-10	W-11	W-12	W-13	W-14	W-15	W-16	W-17	W-18	W-19	W-20	W-21	W-22	W-23	W-24
MM	T-9	T-13	T-8	T-9	T-11	T-14	T-10	T-1	T-3	T-17	T-17	T-7	T-16	T-5	T-15	T-2	T-7	T-14	T-15	T-16	T-13	T-3	T-8	T-12
TS	T-1	T-4	T-18	T-9	T-11	T-10	T-10	T-13	T-14	T-12	T-17	T-15	T-3	T-5	T-15	T-16	T-7	T-13	T-16	T-14	T-8	T-17	T-8	T-12

Attack stage	W-1	W-2	W-3	W-4	W-5	W-6	W-7	W-8	W-9	W-10	W-11	W-12	W-13	W-14	W-15	W-16	W-17	W-18	W-19	W-20	W-21	W-22	W-23	W-24
1	/	/	/	/	/	/	/	T-1	T-3	/	/	/	/	T-5	/	T-2	/	/	/	/	/	T-3	/	/
2	T-3→T-9	/	T-3→T-8	T-3→T-9	T-3→T-11	/	T-3→T-10	/	/	T-3→T-17	T-3→T-17	T-1→T-7	T-3→T-16	/	/	/	T-2→T-7	/	/	T-3→T-16	/	/	T-5→T-8	T-3→T-12
3	/	T-2→T-8→T-13	/	/	/	T-3→T-9→T-14	/	/	/	/	/	/	/	/	T-3→T-9→T-15	/	/	T-3→T-8→T-14	T-3→T-9→T-15	/	T-3→T-7→T-13	/	/	/

Method	Mean value of Monte-Carlo	Confidence interval of Monte-Carlo	Analytical value
MM	72.17	[72.09, 72.27]	72.11
TS	47.26	[47.18, 47.35]	/