Combat system-of-systems verification method based on MBSE-MAR

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2026.000071

Abstract

Abstract:

To address issues such as model discretization, incomplete coverage of verification elements, and broken requirement traceability in the verification of combat system-of-systems (SoS) architectures, the paper proposes a verification method for combat systems based on model-based system engineering-multi-granularity system simulation verification, architecture data model verification and requirements model verification. To achieve consensus on architectural design elements and avoid deviations caused by terminology logic, a meta-model data set is constructed based on the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) meta-model method. The model-based system engineering methodology is introduced to clarify the design and verification framework of combat SoS from requirements analysis, design, analysis to verification. To address the issue of insufficient verification, a closed-loop system verification approach is proposed from the bottom up, encompassing multi-granularity system simulation verification, architectural data model verification, and requirements verification. An unmanned aircraft system cooperative combat SoS is constructed and verified. The verification method can systematically and comprehensively verify the domain, system, SoS architecture, and requirement models, reflecting the rationality, standardization, and effectiveness of the system verification method design. The verification method provides a systematic verification framework for combat SoS. It has engineering application value for improving the design reliability of combat systems.

Key words: combat system-of-systems (SoS), Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF), model-based system engineering

Wangwang Yu, Yunfeng Cao, Xichao Wang, Shengyu Liu. Combat system-of-systems verification method based on MBSE-MAR[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2026, 37(5): 1606-1623.

Figures/Tables 17

Fig 1

Fig 2

Fig 3

Fig 4

Fig 5

Fig 6

Fig 7

Fig 8

Table 1

Fig 9

Fig 10

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig 11

Fig 12

Table 5

References 54

1	Yin T T, Gu Z, Park J H Event-based intermittent formation control of multi-UAV systems under deception attacks. IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2024, 35 (6): 8336. doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3227101
2	Gao Y, Liu H, Zhou Y M An evaluation method of combat aircraft contribution effectiveness based on mission success space design. International Journal of Aeronautical and Space Sciences, 2019, 20 (1): 273. doi: 10.1007/s42405-018-0111-6
3	Wang X Y, Cao Y F, Ding M, et al Research progress in modeling and evaluation of cooperative operation system-of-systems for manned-unmanned aerial vehicles. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 2024, 39 (4): 6. doi: 10.1109/MAES.2023.3347504
4	Li W, Wang Y, Jia L J, et al Battlefield target intelligence system architecture modeling and system optimization. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2024, 35 (5): 1190. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2024.000114
5	Mori S. Joint operations and Indo-Pacific command: development and implementation of the multi-domain battle concept[M]. Singapore: Springer Nature, 2022.
6	Spencer D, Duncan S, Taliaferro A. Operationalizing artificial intelligence for multi-domain operations: a first look[C]// SPIE Defence+Commercial Sensing, 2019. DOI: 10.1117/12.0524227.
7	Cambone S A, Krieg K J, Pace P, et al. Unmanned aircraft systems roadmap 2005-2030. Office of the Secretary of Defense[R].Washington, D.C.: Office of the Secretary of Defense, 2005: 212.
8	U.S. Army Capabilities Integration Center. The U.S. Army concept for multi-domain combined arms operations at echelons above brigade 2025-2045 versatile, agile, and lethal[EB/OL]. [2025-06-10]. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1060758.pdf.
9	Sun Z X, Piao H Y, Yang Z, et al Multi-agent hierarchical policy gradient for air combat tactics emergence via self-play. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2021, 98, 104112. doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2020.104112
10	Xu X J, Wang Y F, Guo X, et al Multi-UAV air combat cooperative game based on virtual opponent and value attention decomposition policy gradient. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2025, 267, 126069.
11	Ren Z, Zhang D, Tang S, et al Cooperative maneuver decision making for multi-UAV air combat based on incomplete information dynamic game. Defence Technology, 2023, 27, 308. doi: 10.1016/j.dt.2022.10.008
12	Li Y Y, Chen W Y, Liu S K, et al Multi-UAV cooperative air combat target assignment method based on VNS-IBPSO in complex dynamic environment. International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2024, 2024 (1): 1.
13	Wang B L, Gao X Z, XIE T An evolutionary multi-agent reinforcement learning algorithm for multi-UAV air combat. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2024, 299, 112000. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2024.112000
14	Martin G Chinese developments keep pressure on regional AEW and C race. Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter (2002), 2025, 51 (1): 20.
15	Harper J Drogue warrior: MQ-25 drone progressing toward new era of naval aviation. National Defense, 2022, 106 (821): 14.
16	INCOSE. Systems engineering vision 2020[EB/OL]. [2025-06-10]. https://sdincose.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/SEVision2020_20071003_v2_03.pdf.
17	INCOSE. Systems Engineering Vision 2035[EB/OL]. [2025-06-10]. https://www.incose.org/publications/se-vision-2035.
18	Ma X J, Chen G H, Zhang J, et al. MBSE modeling method of civil aircraft wheel brake[C]// Institution of Engineering and Technology, 2022: 435.
19	Gerhard D, Salas Cordero S, Vingerhoeds R, et al. MBSE-PLM integration: initiatives and future outlook[C]// IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 2023: 165.
20	Cui Z Y, Luo M Q, Zhang C, et al MBSE for civil aircraft scaled demonstrator requirement analysis and architecting. IEEE Access, 2022, 10, 43112. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3168837
21	Houck K, Ritter C, Burnett T, et al. Beartooth: nuclear material testbed with MBSE and digital twin[C]// 19th Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research, 2022: 142.
22	Fields T M, Glinski S, Harrison E, et al. Applications of an MBSE regulatory framework to electrified aircraft[C]// AIAA AVIATION Forum. 2023. DOI: 10.7514/6.2023-3993.
23	Kaslow D, Ayres J B, Iwata C, et al. CubeSat model based system engineering (MBSE) reference model-application in the concept lifecycle phase[C]// AIAA SPACE Conference and Exposition, 2015. DOI: 10.2514/6.2015-4474.
24	Gao S, Cao W, Fan L H, et al MBSE for satellite communication system architecting. IEEE Access, 2019, 7, 164051. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2952889
25	Wang W Y, Hou J J, Mao Y X, et al Application and development of MBSE in aerospace[C]. // 12th Asia Conference on Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, 2022, 2235, 6.
26	Sundararajan V. Understanding NASA-ESA mars sample return (MSR) campaign concept by model-based systems engineering (MBSE) design and analysis[C]// AIAA Science and Technology Forum and Exposition, 2022. DOI: 10.2514/6.2022-2134.
27	Bendarkar M V, Harrison E, Fields T M, et al. An extended MBSE framework for regulatory analysis of aircraft architectures[C]// AIAA AVIATION Forum, 2023. DOI: 10.2514/6.2023-3611.
28	Zhang X, Wu B, Zhang X, et al An effective MBSE approach for constructing industrial robot digital twin system. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2023, 80, 102455. doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2022.102455
29	Hallqvist R, Munjulury R C, Braun R, et al Realizing interoperability between MBSE domains in aircraft system development. Electronics, 2022, 11 (18): 2901. doi: 10.3390/electronics11182901
30	Khandoker A, Sint S, Gessl G, et al Towards a logical framework for ideal MBSE tool selection based on discipline specific requirements. Journal of Systems and Software, 2022, 189, 111306. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.111306
31	Caruso J, Jakova T, Mills K, et al. Ministry of defence architecture framework MODAF[EB/OL]. [2025-06-10]. https://www.academia.edu/12375286/Ministry_of_Defence_Architecture_Framework_MODAF.
32	DoD Architecture Framework Working Group. DoD architecture framework[EB/OL]. [2025-06-10]. https://dodcio.defense.gov/library/dod-architecture-framework/.
33	Tao Z G, Luo Y F, Chen C X, et al Enterprise application architecture development based on DoDAF and TOGAF[J].. Enterprise Information Systems, 2017, 11 (5): 627. doi: 10.1080/17517575.2015.1068374
34	Martin J N, O’neil D P Enterprise architecture guide for the unified architecture framework (UAF)[J]. . INCOSE International Symposium, 2021, 31 (1): 242. doi: 10.1002/j.2334-5837.2021.00836.x
35	Hu B Y, Xiao J, Hu X G, et al. DoDAF and STK based modeling and simulation of MAV/UAV cooperative detection architecture[C] IEEE 17th Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications, 2022: 755.
36	Fang Z M, Jin W J. Exploring decision patterns for supporting DoDAF based architecture design[C]// IEEE International Conference on Systems, 2022: 2993.
37	Aghamohammadpour A, Mahdipour E, Attarzadeh I Architecting threat hunting system based on the DODAF framework. The Journal of Supercomputing, 2023, 79 (4): 4215. doi: 10.1007/s11227-022-04808-6
38	Zheng H X, Liu X, Wu J H, et al The on-orbit mission analysis of OTV based on DoDAF. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, 2021, 93 (6): 937. doi: 10.1108/AEAT-03-2020-0062
39	Wan M, Hou Y, Wang Q Research on operational architecture modeling of space-based maritime reconnaissance and surveillance system. Modern Defence Technology, 2020, 48 (4): 34.
40	Zhang Y, Jiang J, Yang K W, et al Intelligent modeling method for OV models in DoDAF2. 0 based on knowledge graph[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2025, 36 (1): 139.
41	Li M H, Zhang A, Bi W H, et al. Bio-inspired UAV swarm coordination control system architecture based on UAF meta-model[C]// Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Aerospace Technology, 2023: 855.
42	Liu X H, Cao Y F, Wang B, et al Flight control system conceptual prototype design based on SysML and simulink. Journal of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 2011, 40 (6): 887.
43	Wang X Y, Cao Y F, Sun H J, et al Modeling for cooperative combat system architecture of manned/unmanned aerial vehicle based on DoDAF. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42 (10): 2265.
44	Li Z, Tan X, Wang H, et al Data consistency verification of architecture based on DM2. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2013, 35 (2): 357.
45	Li Z H, Tan X S, Wang H, et al The method of the architecture data completeness verification based on the DM2. Journal of Academy of Equipment, 2012, 23 (5): 117.
46	Zhang T Q, Lyu W M, Chen J, et al Architecture modeling for shore-ship missile weapon and equipment system based on DoDAF. Fire Control & Command Control, 2022, 47 (5): 20.
47	Shi L K, Pei Y, Yun Q J, et al Agent-based effectiveness evaluation method and impact analysis of airborne laser weapon system in cooperation combat. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2023, 36 (4): 442. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2022.11.006
48	Chen Z W, Hong D P, Cui W W, et al Resilience evaluation and optimal design for weapon system of systems with dynamic reconfiguration. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2023, 237, 109409.
49	Ju C Y, Wang S M, Wang T. Research on verification technology of aircraft RMS based on MBSE[C]// International Conference on Aircraft Utility Systems, 2020: 171.
50	Caines C, Jaques D, Geiger J Standard verification using model based systems engineering[J].. INCOSE International Symposium, 2022, 32 (S2): 179.
51	Chen R R, Chen C H, Liu Y S, et al Ontology-based requirement verification for complex systems. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2020, 46, 101148. doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2020.101148
52	Henåker L Exploring military victory in battle: a qualitative study on contemporary tactics. Defence Studies, 2020, 20 (2): 163. doi: 10.1080/14702436.2020.1750300
53	Gao P, Liu R, Gu H B, et al Modeling and verification method of operational concepts based on system deduction. Fire Control & Command Control, 2023, 48 (10): 49.
54	Wei J C, Zhang J, Yang W Y, et al Design for integrated disposal system architecture of low-slow-small aerocraft based on DoDAF[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2024, 46 (1): 162.

Combat situation	Value
Number of UCAVs	5
Task assignment results	{1,2,0,2,3,3}
SoS combat effectiveness	0.7128
Number of opponent aircraft	3
Number of opponent aircraft escaped	2
Number of opponent aircraft destroyed	1

Entity	Performer	Resource information	Activity
Performer	0	≥2	≥1
Resource information	≥1	0	≥1
Capability	≥1	0	≥1
Rule	0	0	≥1
Objective	≥1	0	≥1

PAR	Performer	Activity
PAR01	RS (P01)	Detection (A02)
PAR02	DPC (P02)	Data processing (A05), Situational computing (A06)
PAR03	GCCC (P03)	Issue the reconnaissance and detection command (A01), Situational analysis (A07), Strategic planning (A08), SoS combat effectiveness evaluation (A48)
PAR04	AEW (P04)	Detection (A03), Mission planning (A09), Operational deployment (A10), Situational analysis (A26), Mission replanning (A27), Lead to contact (A28), Combat evaluation (A40), Issued return orders (A41), Return (A42), Battle information gathering (A47)
PAR05	URA (P05)	Detection (A04), Take off (A11), Trajectory planning (A15), Electronic reconnaissance (A19), Return (A43)
PAR06	EWUAVs (P06)	Take off (A12), Trajectory planning (A16), Electronic reconnaissance (A20), Target acquisition (A29), Radar interference (A30), Communication interference (A31), Electronic fraud (A32), Situation awareness (A33), Return (A44)
PAR07	ART (P07)	Take off (A13), Trajectory planning (A17), Aerial refueling (A24), Return (A45)
PAR08	UCAVs (P08)	Take off (A14), Trajectory planning (A18), Formation assembly (A21), Formation flying (A22), Break formation (A25), Aerial refueling (A23), Tactical deployment (A34), Gain tactical advantages (A35), Target allocation (A36), Lock on target (A37), Cooperative strike (A38), Strike assessment (A39), Return (A46)

Index	Verfication method in [43]	Verfication method in [53]	Verfication method in [46]	Verfication method in [54]	MBSE-MAR
Verification level	SoS level	SoS level	SoS level	SoS level, system level	SoS level, system level, subsystem level
Based on the MBSE methodology	×	×	×	×	√
Support demand traceability	−	−	−	−	√
Dynamic simulation	√	√	√	√	√
Verification type	Sequence verification	Simulation verification	−	Simulation verification	Sequence verification and simulation verification
Data model verification type	−	−	Completeness, data consistency, and data assignment consistency	−	Completeness, accessibility, association consistency, assignment relationship