Approach for air-to-air confrontment based on uncertain interval information conditions

doi:10.21629/JSEE.2019.01.10

Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (1): 100-109.doi: 10.21629/JSEE.2019.01.10

收稿日期:2017-11-06 出版日期:2019-02-27 发布日期:2019-02-27

Approach for air-to-air confrontment based on uncertain interval information conditions

Qiuni LI¹(), Rennong YANG¹(), Chao FENG²(), Zongcheng LIU^1,*()

¹ Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering College, Air Force Engineering University, Xi'an 710038, China
² Unit 66133 of the PLA, Beijing 100000, China

Received:2017-11-06 Online:2019-02-27 Published:2019-02-27
Contact: Zongcheng LIU E-mail:lqnjk1@126.com;yangrn6907@foxmail.com;1216682261@qq.com;liu434853780@163.com
About author:LI Qiuni was born in 1985. She received her M.S. degree from Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering College, Air Force Engineering University, Xi'an, China in 2013. She is currently pursuing her Ph.D. degree at Air Force Engineering University. Her research interests include game theory, multi-agent systems, multi-objective optimization, particularly modeling, simulation and its application. E-mail:lqnjk1@126.com|YANG Rennong was born in 1969. He received his M.S. degree from Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering College, Air Force Engineering University, Xi'an, China. He is currently a professor in Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering College, Air Force Engineering University. His main research interests include game theory, complex networks theory and optimization theory and applications. E-mail:yangrn6907@foxmail.com|FENG Chao was born in 1991. He received his M.S. degree from Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering College, Air Force Engineering University, Xi'an, China in 2016. His research interests include multi-objective optimization and collaborative planning, particularly modeling, and simulation. E-mail:1216682261@qq.com|LIU Zongcheng was born in 1987. He received his B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering and automation from Air Force Engineering University, Xi'an, China in 2009, and his M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in control theory and engineering from Air Force Engineering University, in 2011 and 2015, respectively. He is currently a lecturer in Air Force Engineering University. His research interests include flight control, intelligent and autonomous control and neural networks. E-mail:liu434853780@163.com
Supported by:
the National Natural Science Foundation of China(61603411);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(60573172);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(50875132);This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61603411; 60573172; 50875132)

摘要/Abstract

Abstract:

Model combat information conditions are always uncertain and varied, the uncertain interval theory is therefore introduced into the research of multiple fighters suppressing the integrated air defense system (IADS) problem. Considering that the combat information conditions are uncertain intervals, the payoff function of the game for multiple fighters suppressing the IADS is modeled. Using the operation rules for interval numbers and the possibility degree, an improved chaotic particle swarm optimization (CPSO) is designed to solve the proposed model so as to obtain the optimal game solution. Comparison simulations are performed to analyze the influence of the weapons consumption and the distances of non-escaped zone and jamming on air combat result. Simulation results suggest that Nash equilibrium is achieved and verify the effectiveness of the proposed method.

Key words: interval information, integrated air defense system (IADS), air combat, chaotic particle swarm optimization (CPSO), game

. [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30(1): 100-109.

Qiuni LI, Rennong YANG, Chao FENG, Zongcheng LIU. Approach for air-to-air confrontment based on uncertain interval information conditions[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30(1): 100-109.

图/表 4

参考文献 20

1	HAQUE M, EGERSTEDT M. Multilevel coalition formation strategy for suppression of enemy air defenses missions. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, 2013, 10 (6): 287- 296.
2	POLAT C, IBRAHIM K, ABDULLAH S A, et al. The small and silent force multiplier:a swarm UAV-electronic attack. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 2013, 70 (1-4): 595- 608.
3	YAN Z J, WU D W, JIANG W T. Deployment of aerial jammers in network-type GPS jamming system. Electronics Optics Control, 2013, 20 (5): 37- 43.
4	ZHI Z, LEI Y, ZHU Y. Modeling and simulation of operation process for networked air and missile defense systems. Journal of National University of Defense Technology, 2015, 37 (3): 179- 184.
5	RIDDER J P, HANDUBER J C. Mission planning for joint suppression of enemy air defenses using a genetic algorithm. Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, 2005: 1929-1936.
6	SUMANTA K D. Modeling intelligent decision-making command and control agents:an application to air defense. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2014, 29 (5): 1541- 1672.
7	NICK E, KELLY C. Fuzzy logic based intelligent agents for unmanned combat aerial vehicle control. Journal of Defense Management, 2015, 6 (1): 1- 3.
8	YOO D W, LEE C H, TAHK M J. Optimal resource management algorithm for unmanned aerial vehicle missions in hostile territories. Proc. of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2013, 228(12): 2157-2167.
9	ZHANG J, JIANG J, CHEN Y W. Air defense and antimissile weapons allocation in hierarchical systems under multi-objectives and multi decision-makers condition. Journal of National University of Defense Technology, 2015, 37 (1): 171- 178.
10	SUJIT P B, GHOSE D. Search by UAVs with flight time constraints using game theoretical models. Proc. of AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit, 2005: 1929-1936.
11	GHOSE D, KRICHMAN M, SPEYER J L, et al. Modeling and analysis of air campaign resource allocation:a spatiotemporal decomposition approach. IEEE Trans. on Systems Man & Cybernetics-Part A Systems & Humans, 2002, 32 (3): 403- 418.
12	MOORE R E. Interval analysis. New Jersey: Prentiee-Hall Englewood Cliffs, 1996.
13	SENGUPTA A, PAL T K. On comparing interval numbers. European Journal of Operational Research, 2000, 32 (3): 403- 418.
14	ZHANG Q, FAN Z P, PAN D H. A ranking approach for interval numbers in uncertain multiple attribute decision making problems. System Engineering Theory and Practice, 1999, 19 (5): 129- 133.
15	ZHANG H, ZHANG T N, SHEN J H. Research on decisionmakings of structure optimization based on improved chaos PSO. Control and Decision, 2008, 23 (8): 857- 862.
16	ZHANG X J, DAI G Z, XU N P. Study on diversity of population in genetic algorithms. Control Theory and Applications, 1998, 15 (1): 17- 22.
17	RATNAWEERA A, HALGAMURE S K, WATSON H C. Selforganizing hierarchical particle swarm optimizer with timevarying acceleration coefficients. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation, 2004, 8 (3): 240- 255.
18	LIU Q, WANG X Y, FU Q M. Double elite coevolutionary genetic algorithm. Journal of Software, 2012, 23 (4): 765- 775.
19	ZHU X L, WANG B. Niche genetic algorithm based on cluster division. Control and Decision, 2010, 25 (7): 1113- 1116.
20	CHENG T L. A novel hybrid teaching learning based multiobjective particle swarm optimization. Neurocomputing, 2017, 222 (C): 11- 25.

Value	Fighters(No.)
Value	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
Value(min)	0.30	0.20	0.34	0.24	0.64	0.42	0.42	0.21	0.45	0.12
Value(max)	0.80	0.35	0.45	0.82	0.72	0.87	0.77	0.74	0.65	0.52

Threat	Fighters(No.)
Threat	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
Threat(min)	0.7	0.2	0.7	0.4	0.3	0.2	0.5	0.4	0.4	0.3
Threat(max)	0.9	0.3	0.9	0.8	0.7	0.7	0.8	0.8	0.7	0.8

Condition of suppressing side	Condition of defensing side	Winning times (percentage of suppressing side)/%	Winning times (percentage of defensing side)/%	Draw times	Average time/s
Initial condition $(h_1 = 4, h_2 = 4, g_1 = 80\; {\rm{km}}, g_2 = 80\; {\rm{km}}, f_1 = 80\; {\rm{km}}, f_2 = 80\; {\rm{km}})$
		13/43.33	12/40.00	5	69.89
The first group experiments (The distance of non-escaped zone is adjusted)
$g_1 = 140$ km	$g_2 = 80$ km	29/96.67	1/3.33	0	62.52
$g_1 = 120$ km	$g_2 = 80$ km	28/93.33	1/3.33	1	65.29
$g_1 = 100$ km	$g_2 = 80$ km	26/86.67	2/6.67	2	69.11
The second group experiments (The weapons consumption is adjusted)
$h_1 = 7$	$h_2 = 4$	25/83.34	5/16.66	0	62.71
$h_1 = 6$	$h_2 = 4$	22/73.34	7/23.34	1	65.30
$h_1 = 5$	$h_2 = 4$	18/60.00	10/33.34	2	67.04
The third group experiments (The distance of jamming is adjusted)
$f_1 = 140$ km	$f_2 = 80$ km	19/63.34	11/36.67	0	70.13
$f_1 = 120$ km	$f_2 = 80$ km	18/60.00	9/30.00	3	70.79
$f_1 = 100$ km	$f_2 = 80$ km	18/60.00	11/36.67	1	74.91

Approach for air-to-air confrontment based on uncertain interval information conditions

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 20

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价