Uncertainty entropy-based exploratory evaluation method and its applications on missile effectiveness evaluation

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2023.000063

Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics ›› 2023, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (6): 1602-1613.doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2023.000063

• SYSTEMS ENGINEERING • Previous Articles Next Articles

Uncertainty entropy-based exploratory evaluation method and its applications on missile effectiveness evaluation

Jianwen HU¹(), Zhihui WANG¹^,²^,*(), Yuan GAO³(), Xiaomin ZHU⁴(), Yongliang TIAN³(), Hu LIU³()

¹ Consulting Center for Strategic Assessment, Academy of Military Science, Beijing 100097, China
² Army Academy of Artillery and Air Defense (Nanjing Campus), Nanjing 211132, China
³ School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
⁴ College of Systems Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410072, China

Received:2022-08-26 Online:2023-12-18 Published:2023-12-29
Contact: Zhihui WANG E-mail:hjwc3i@126.com;zhwang66@foxmail.com;gybuaa@buaa.edu.cn;xmzhu@nudt.edu.cn;tianyl@buaa.edu.cn;liuhu99@buaa.edu.cn
About author:
HU Jianwen was born in 1975. He received his bachelor degree from Air Force Early Warning Academy. He received his master degree and Ph.D. degree from National University of Defense Technology. He is a professor with Academy of Military Science. His research interests are exploratory decision theory and simulation experiment. E-mail: hjwc3i@126.com

WANG Zhihui was born in 1995. He received his bachelor degree from Jiangnan University and master degree from Armored Forces Engineering Academy, PLA. He is a Ph.D. student of Academy of Military Science. He is also a lecturer at Army Academy of Artillery and Air Defense (Nanjing Campus). His research interests are exploratory decision theory, military operations, electrical engineering and autonomous systems. E-mail: zhwang66@foxmail.com

GAO Yuan was born in 1993. He received his bachelor and master degrees from the Department of Aircraft Design, School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, Beihang University. His research interests include machine learning, autonomous systems, and multi-agent modelling and simulation. E-mail: gybuaa@buaa.edu.cn

ZHU Xiaomin was born in 1979. He received his Ph.D. degree in computer science from Fudan University in 2009. He is currently a professor with the College of Systems Engineering at National University of Defense Technology. His research interests include scheduling and resource management in distributed systems. E-mail: xmzhu@nudt.edu.cn

TIAN Yongliang was born in 1985. He received his bachelor and Ph.D. degrees from Beihang University. He is now an associate professor at Beihang University. He is also a master’s student advisor. His research interests include overall design of aircraft, system modeling and simulation, system engineering, and system effectiveness assessment. E-mail: tianyl@buaa.edu.cn

LIU Hu was born in 1980. He received his bachelor and Ph.D. degrees from Beihang University. He is now a professor at Beihang University. He is also a doctoral supervisor. His main research areas are aircraft systematic design and operation support technology, including multi-mission optimization technology based on systematic effectiveness assessment, and virtual reality-based training and decision support technology. E-mail: liuhu99@buaa.edu.cn
Supported by:
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61872378).

Abstract

Abstract:

Some attributes are uncertain for evaluation work because of incomplete or limited information and knowledge. It leads to uncertainty in evaluation results. To that end, an evaluation method, uncertainty entropy-based exploratory evaluation (UEEE), is proposed to guide the evaluation activities, which can iteratively and gradually reduce uncertainty in evaluation results. Uncertainty entropy (UE) is proposed to measure the extent of uncertainty. First, the belief degree distributions are assumed to characterize the uncertainty in attributes. Then the belief degree distribution of the evaluation result can be calculated by using uncertainty theory. The obtained result is then checked based on UE to see if it could meet the requirements of decision-making. If its uncertainty level is high, more information needs to be introduced to reduce uncertainty. An algorithm based on the UE is proposed to find which attribute can mostly affect the uncertainty in results. Thus, efforts can be invested in key attribute(s), and the evaluation results can be updated accordingly. This update should be repeated until the evaluation result meets the requirements. Finally, as a case study, the effectiveness of ballistic missiles with uncertain attributes is evaluated by UEEE. The evaluation results show that the target is believed to be destroyed.

Key words: uncertainty entropy-based exploratory evaluation (UEEE), evaluation activity, belief degree distribution, missile effectiveness

Jianwen HU, Zhihui WANG, Yuan GAO, Xiaomin ZHU, Yongliang TIAN, Hu LIU. Uncertainty entropy-based exploratory evaluation method and its applications on missile effectiveness evaluation[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 34(6): 1602-1613.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig 1

Fig 2

Fig 3

Fig 4

Fig 5

Fig 6

Fig 7

Fig 8

Fig 9

Fig 10

Fig 11

Fig 12

References 44

1	WANG H. Chinese maritime transformation and sea power: a net assessment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 2021.
2	CHENG C H, YANG K L, HWANG C L Evaluating attack helicopters by AHP based on linguistic variable weight. European Journal of Operational Research, 1999, 116 (2): 423- 435. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00156-8
3	LUO B Y, YE Y, YAO N, et al Interval number ranking method based on multiple decision attitudes and its application in decision making. Soft Computing, 2021, 25 (5): 4091- 4101. doi: 10.1007/s00500-020-05434-1
4	JIANG J R, REN M, WANG J Q Interval number multi-attribute decision-making method based on TOPSIS. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 2022, 61 (7): 5059- 5064. doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2021.09.031
5	WAN S P, DONG J Y. Decision making theories and methods based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Berlin: Springer Nature, 2020.
6	WU Y N, XU H, XU C, et al Uncertain multi-attributes decision making method based on interval number with probability distribution weighted operators and stochastic dominance degree. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2016, 113, 199- 209. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2016.09.023
7	HUANG F, YE Z, JIANG S H, et al Uncertainty study of landslide susceptibility prediction considering the different attribute interval numbers of environmental factors and different data-based models. Catena, 2021, 202, 105250. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105250
8	XU Z S Dependent uncertain ordered weighted aggregation operators. Information Fusion, 2008, 9 (2): 310- 316. doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2006.10.008
9	BANDTE O. A probabilistic multi-criteria decision making technique for conceptual and preliminary aerospace systems design. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology, 2000.
10	KIRBY M, MARIS D. A method for technology selection based on benefit, available schedule and budget resources. Proc. of the World Aviation Conference, 2000: 5563.
11	ALRWASHDEH S S, ALSARAIREH F M Wind energy production assessment at different sites in Jordan using probability distribution functions. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2018, 13 (20): 8163- 8172.
12	LIN S S, SHEN S L, ZHOU A, et al Risk assessment and management of excavation system based on fuzzy set theory and machine learning methods. Automation in Construction, 2021, 122, 103490. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103490
13	MARDANI A, HOOKER R E, OZKUL S, et al Application of decision making and fuzzy sets theory to evaluate the healthcare and medical problems: a review of three decades of research with recent developments. Expert Systems with Applications, 2019, 137, 202- 231. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2019.07.002
14	HESAMIAN G, AKBARI M G A robust multiple regression model based on fuzzy random variables. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 2021, 388, 113270. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2020.113270
15	GAO S, SUN H H, ZHAO L, et al Dynamic assessment of island ecological environment sustainability under urbanization based on rough set, synthetic index and catastrophe progression analysis theories. Ocean & Coastal Management, 2019, 178, 104790.
16	KIM W, YIM C No-reference image contrast quality assessment based on the degree of uniformity in probability distribution. IEIE Trans. on Smart Processing & Computing, 2022, 11 (2): 85- 91.
17	MEHDI K G Assessment of distribution center locations using a multi-expert subjective−objective decision-making approach. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11 (1): 1- 19. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-79139-8
18	SPETZLER C, WINTER H, MEYER J. Decision quality: value creation from better business decision. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
19	HOWARD R A The foundations of decision analysis. IEEE Trans. on Systems Science and Cybernetics, 1968, 4 (3): 211- 219. doi: 10.1109/TSSC.1968.300115
20	SOBOL I M Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics & Computers in Simulation, 2001, 55 (1): 271- 280.
21	KARUNANIDHI D, ARAVINTHASAMY P, SUBRAMANI T, et al Chromium contamination in groundwater and Sobol sensitivity model based human health risk evaluation from leather tanning industrial region of South India. Environmental Research, 2021, 199, 111238. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111238
22	KARUNANIDHI D, ARAVINTHASAMY P, KUMAR D, et al Sobol sensitivity approach for the appraisal of geomedical health risks associated with oral intake and dermal pathways of groundwater fluoride in a semi-arid region of South India. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2020, 194, 110438. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.110438
23	LIU B D Why is there a need for uncertainty theory. Journal of Uncertain Systems, 2012, 6 (1): 3- 10.
24	LIU B D Uncertain urn problems and Ellsberg experiment. Soft Computing, 2019, 23, 6579- 6584. doi: 10.1007/s00500-018-3306-7
25	SIREGAR D, NURDIYANTO H, SRIADHI S, et al Multi-attribute decision making with VIKOR method for any purpose decision. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2018, 1019, 012034. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1019/1/012034
26	ZHANG K, ZHAN J M, WU W Z, et al Fuzzy β-covering based (I, T)-fuzzy rough set models and applications to multi-attribute decision-making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2019, 128, 605- 621.
27	WANG J J, MA X, XU Z, et al Three-way multi-attribute decision making under hesitant fuzzy environments. Information Sciences, 2021, 552, 328- 351. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2020.12.005
28	ALI Z, MAHMOOD T, SANTOS-GARCIA G Heronian mean operators based on novel complex linear diophantine uncertain linguistic variables and their applications in multi-attribute decision making. Mathematics, 2021, 9 (21): 2730. doi: 10.3390/math9212730
29	ROSE T. The end of average: how to succeed in a world that values sameness. London: Penguin UK, 2016.
30	LIU B D. Uncertainty theory: a branch of mathematics for modeling human uncertainty. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2011.
31	KIUREGHIAN A D, DITLEVSEN O. Aleatory or epistemic? Does it matter? Structural Safety, 2009, 31(2): 105−112.
32	REN B, LU Z Z, ZHOU C C, et al A novel method for importance measure analysis in the presence of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2014, 27 (120): 112- 120.
33	KANG R, ZHANG Q Y, ZENG Z G, et al Measuring reliability under epistemic uncertainty: review on non-probabilistic reliability metrics. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2016, 29 (3): 571- 579. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2016.04.004
34	DI BERNARDO R, MELLONE M, MINICHINI C, et al. Subjective probability: mathematical teachers ’ specialised knowledge in a betting game. Proc. of the 12th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, 2022. https://hal.science/hal-03748727/.
35	YAMAZAKI A Recovering subjective probability distributions. Journal of Futures Markets, 2022, 42 (7): 1234- 1263. doi: 10.1002/fut.22328
36	YAKHYAEVA G, SKOKOVA V. Subjective expert evaluations in the model-theoretic representation of object domain knowledge. Proc. of the Russian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2021: 152−165.
37	KWAKERNAAK H Fuzzy random variables—I. Definitions and theorems. Information Sciences, 1978, 15 (1): 1- 29. doi: 10.1016/0020-0255(78)90019-1
38	LIU B D. Uncertainty theory. 4th ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2015.
39	HUBBARD D W. How to measure anything: finding the value of intangibles in business. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2014.
40	HU J W. Exploratory decision analysis. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 2020. (in Chinese)
41	TALEB N N. The black swan: the impact of the highly improbable. 2nd ed. New York: Random House, 2007.
42	HU J W, HU X, ZHANG W, et al Monotonic indices space method and its application in the capability indices effectiveness analysis of a notional antistealth information system. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics−Part A: Systems and Humans, 2009, 39 (2): 404- 413. doi: 10.1109/TSMCA.2008.2010793
43	GAO Y, TIAN Y L, LIU H, et al Entropy based inverse design of aircraft mission success space in system-of-systems confrontation. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2021, 34 (12): 99- 109. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2021.04.003
44	SURWIECKI J. The wisdom of crowds. New York: Anchor, 2005.

Uncertainty entropy-based exploratory evaluation method and its applications on missile effectiveness evaluation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

Share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 44

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments