基于作战态势和改进CRITIC-TOPSIS的目标威胁评估模型

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2023.08.07

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对当前防空作战的目标威胁评估方法对于敌方目标间态势考虑不全、未能较好利用目标动态信息等问题, 提出基于作战态势和改进的客观赋权法(criteria importance though intercrieria correlation, CRITIC)和逼近理想解排序法(technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution, TOPSIS)的目标动态威胁评估模型。首先, 在敌我态势指标体系的基础上, 提出基于作战环理论的敌方目标间态势威胁指标体系。然后, 使用改进的CRITIC确定权重, 通过TOPSIS方法计算威胁度。最后, 提出基于态势变化程度计算时间权重, 通过态势因子加权得到最终评估结果。实验结果表明, 基于作战态势和改进CRITIC-TOPSIS的目标威胁评估模型可以综合考虑敌我态势、敌方目标间态势和态势动态信息, 对目标做出灵活全面的威胁评估。

关键词: 防空作战, 威胁评估, 逼近理想解排序法, 客观赋权法, 动态评估

Abstract:

Aiming at the problems that the current target threat assessment method in air defense operations does not fully consider the situational factors of enemy's inter-target and cannot make good use of dynamic information, a target dynamic threat assessment model based on the improved criteria importance though intercrieria correlation (CRITIC) and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) is proposed. Firstly, on the basis of situational index system of enemy targets relative to our side, a situational threat index system between enemy's inter-target based on the operational loop theory is proposed. Then, the improved CRITIC method is used to determine the weights, and the TOPSIS is used to calculate the threat level. Finally, a time weighting factor is introduced to consider the degree of situational changes in the calculation of time weight, and the final evaluation result is obtained by weighting the situational factors. The experimental results show that the target threat assessment model based on operational situation and improved CRITIC-TOPSIS can comprehensively consider the situation between the enemy and ourside, the situation enemy targets and the dynamic changes, and can make flexible and comprehensive threat evaluation of targets.

Key words: air defense operation, threat assessment, technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), criteria importance though intercrieria correlation (CRITIC), dynamic assessment

中图分类号:

E919
TP247

苏倩, 钟元芾, 曹志钦, 张英朝. 基于作战态势和改进CRITIC-TOPSIS的目标威胁评估模型[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2023, 45(8): 2343-2352.

Qian SU, Yuanfu ZHONG, Zhiqin CAO, Yingchao ZHANG. Target threat assessment model based on operational situation and improved CRITIC-TOPSIS[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 45(8): 2343-2352.

图/表 16

图1

表1

表2

表3

图2

表4

表5

图3

图4

表6

表7

表8

表9

表10

表11

图5

参考文献 24

1	霍润泽, 曹泽阳, 李威. 基于随机森林赋权和TOPSIS-RSR的目标威胁等级评估[J]. 空军工程大学学报, 2023, 24 (1): 82- 88.
	HUO R Z , CAO Z Y , LI W . Target threat level assessment based on random forest weighting and TOPSIS-RSR[J]. Journal of Air Force Engineering University, 2023, 24 (1): 82- 88.
2	刘芳, 张勇, 宫华, 等. 基于DBN-TOPSIS法的空中目标融合威胁评估[J]. 兵器装备工程学报, 2023, 44 (1): 136- 143. doi: 10.11809/bqzbgcxb2023.01.021
	LIU F , ZHANG Y , GONG H , et al. Threat assessment of air target fusion based on DBN-TOPSIS[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment Engineering, 2023, 44 (1): 136- 143. doi: 10.11809/bqzbgcxb2023.01.021
3	鲍俊臣, 韩道文, 程立, 等. 基于层次分析法的穿透性制空作战飞机威胁评估[EB/OL].[2023-05-10]. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.3019.tj.20230331.1520.007.html.
	BAO J C, HAN D W, CHENG L, et al. Threat assessment of penetrating air combat aircraft based on analytic hierarchy process[EB/OL].[2023-05-10]. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.3019.tj.20230331.1520.007.html.
4	方诚喆, 寇英信, 徐安, 等. 基于AHP-CRITIC组合赋权的VIKOR空战威胁评估[J]. 电光与控制, 2021, 28 (2): 24- 28.
	FANG C Z , KOU Y X , XU A , et al. VIKOR air combat threat assessment based on AHP-CRITIC combination weighting[J]. Electronics Optics & Control, 2021, 28 (2): 24- 28.
5	毕晓伟, 刘漫漫, 方东生, 等. 基于因子分析的目标威胁排序方法[J]. 电子信息对抗技术, 2023, 38 (2): 1- 7.
	BI X W , LIU M M , FANG D S , et al. Target threat sorting method based on factor analysis[J]. Electronic Information Warfare Technology, 2023, 38 (2): 1- 7.
6	杨璐, 刘付显, 张涛, 等. 基于组合赋权TOPSIS法的舰艇编队空中目标威胁评估模型[J]. 电光与控制, 2019, 26 (8): 6- 11.
	YANG L , LIU F X , ZHANG T , et al. A threat assessment model for air targets in ship formation based on combined weighted TOPSIS method[J]. Electronics Optics & Control, 2019, 26 (8): 6- 11.
7	WANG X , ZUO J L , YANG R N , et al. Target threat assessment based on dynamic Bayesian network[J]. Journal of Phy-sics: Conference Series, 2019, 1302 (4): 042023. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1302/4/042023
8	XU Y J , WANG Y C , MIU X D . Multi-attribute decision making method for air target threat evaluation based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2012, 23 (6): 891- 897. doi: 10.1109/JSEE.2012.00109
9	WANG Y , LIU S Y , NIU W , et al. Threat assessment method based on intuitionistic fuzzy similarity measurement reasoning with orientation[J]. China Communication, 2014, 11 (6): 119- 128. doi: 10.1109/CC.2014.6879010
10	徐宇恒, 程嗣怡, 庞梦洋. 基于CRITIC-TOPSIS的动态辐射源威胁评估[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2020, 46 (11): 2168- 2175.
	XU Y H , CHENG S Y , PANG M Y . Dynamic radiation source threat assessment based on CRITIC-TOPSIS[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2020, 46 (11): 2168- 2175.
11	张才坤, 冯琦, 张堃. 基于IFE的改进TOPSIS法多目标威胁评估[J]. 飞行力学, 2014, 32 (3): 281- 284.
	ZHANG C K , FENG Q , ZHANG K . Improved TOPSIS method for multitarget threat assessment based on IFE[J]. Flight Dynamics, 2014, 32 (3): 281- 284.
12	靳崇, 孙娟, 王永佳, 等. 基于直觉模糊TOPSIS和变权VIKOR的防空目标威胁综合评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44 (1): 172- 180.
	JIN C , SUN J , WANG Y J , et al. Comprehensive threat assessment of air defense targets based on intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS and variable weight VIKOR[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44 (1): 172- 180.
13	李全根, 周中良, 张晓杰, 等. 基于综合集成赋权法和TOPSIS法的空中目标威胁评估[J]. 电光与控制, 2022, 29 (5): 39-42, 47
	LI Q G , ZHOU Z L , ZHANG X J , et al. Air target threat assessment based on integrated weighting and TOPSIS methods[J]. Electronics Optics & Control, 2022, 29 (5): 39-42, 47
14	张堃, 王雪, 张才坤, 等. 基于IFE动态直觉模糊法的目标威胁评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2014, 36 (4): 697- 701.
	ZHANG K , WANG X , ZHANG C K , et al. Target threat assessment based on IFE dynamic intuitionistic fuzzy method[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2014, 36 (4): 697- 701.
15	孙云柯, 方志耕, 陈顶. 基于动态灰色主成分分析的多时刻威胁评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43 (3): 740- 746.
	SUN Y K , FANG Z G , CHEN D . Multi temporal threat assessment based on dynamic grey principal component analysis[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 43 (3): 740- 746.
16	李威, 卢盈齐, 范成礼, 等. 基于组合赋权和改进VIKOR的动态威胁评估[J]. 航空兵器, 2022, 29 (5): 66- 75.
	LI W , LU Y Q , FANG C L , et al. Dynamic threat assessment based on combination weighting and improved VIKOR[J]. Aero Weaponry, 2022, 29 (5): 66- 75.
17	李杰, 谭跃进. 基于集成改进蚁群算法的作战环推荐方法[EB/OL].[2023-05-13]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.2422.TN.20220927.1718.010.html.
	LI J, TAN Y J. Battle ring recommendati on method based on integrated improved ant colony algorithm[EB/OL].[2023-05-13]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.2422.TN.20220927.1718.010.html.
18	梁家林, 熊伟. 基于作战环的武器装备体系能力评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2019, 41 (8): 1810- 1819.
	LIANG J L , XIONG W . A method for evaluating the capability of weapon equipment systems based on the operational environment[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 41 (8): 1810- 1819.
19	任晓龙, 吕琳媛. 网络重要节点排序方法综述[J]. 科学通报, 2014, 59 (13): 1175- 1197.
	REN X L , LYU L Y . Review of network important node ranking methods[J]. Science Bulletin, 2014, 59 (13): 1175- 1197.
20	ZHANG H Y , LI Y J , ZHANG K , et al. Hazard degree identification of goafs based on scale effect of structure by RS-TOPSIS method[J]. Journal of Central South University, 2015, 22 (2): 684- 692.
21	虞晓芬, 傅玳. 多指标综合评价方法综述[J]. 统计与决策, 2004, (11): 119- 121.
	YU X F , FU D . Overview of multiple indicator comprehensive evaluation methods[J]. Statistics & Decision, 2004, (11): 119- 121.
22	李俭慧, 彭淑燕, 杨帆, 等. 水面舰艇编队防空和信息化战争评估模型[J]. 数学的实践与认识, 2016, 46 (14): 113- 122.
	LI J H , PENG S Y , YANG F , et al. Evaluation model of air defense and information war for surface combatant formation[J]. Journal of Mathematics in Practice and Theory, 2016, 46 (14): 113- 122.
23	胡智勇, 刘华丽, 龚淑君, 等. 基于随机森林的目标意图识别[J]. 现代电子技术, 2022, 45 (19): 1- 8.
	HU Z Y , LIU H L , GONG S J , et al. Target intention recognition based on random forest[J]. Modern Electronic Techno-logy, 2022, 45 (19): 1- 8.
24	张瑜, 邓鑫洋, 李明炟, 等. 基于证据网络因果分析的空中目标意图识别[J]. 航空学报, 2022, 43 (S1): 143- 156.
	ZHANG Y , DENG X Y , LI M D , et al. Air target intention recognition based on evidence network causal analysis[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2022, 43 (S1): 143- 156.

参数	意图
参数	攻击	侦察	监视	其他	掩护
威胁值	0.9	0.7	0.6	0.5	0.3

参数	意图
参数	侦察监视	侦察	攻击掩护其他
实体类别	侦察类S	决策类D	打击类I

参数	连边
参数	D-I(打击)	I-T	D-S S-I	D-I(掩护)	D/S-I(其他)
威胁	0.8	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.3

时刻	目标ID	目标高度/km	距离/km	速度/(m/s)	方位角/(°)	航向角/(°)	大小	意图
t₁	30	7.000	215.215	137.482	135.232	29.610	3.1	侦察
	31	9.200	209.147	224.283	250.041	77.431	3.5	其他
	36	4.600	223.663	223.436	112.782	80.268	5.7	其他
	37	5.200	222.841	190.698	204.852	321.863	1.9	掩护
	39	5.200	232.025	96.131	71.034	169.651	4.3	监视
	42	3.400	163.612	257.328	25.804	138.914	5.5	侦察
	51	2.600	167.824	244.979	271.227	233.860	2.6	攻击
	60	9.400	207.484	125.300	196.662	260.393	5.5	其他
	72	6.000	236.855	173.509	175.980	189.192	6.2	攻击
	85	1.400	209.545	302.469	351.668	190.228	1.7	攻击
	91	4.800	228.231	195.281	41.755	139.885	1.1	其他
	93	8.600	240.604	182.536	85.199	244.724	3.1	攻击
t₂	30	7.000	215.077	137.475	135.222	29.612	3.1	侦察
	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮
	93	8.600	240.421	182.491	85.174	244.725	3.1	攻击
t₃	30	7.000	214.940	137.469	135.212	29.610	3.1	侦察
	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮
	93	8.600	240.430	8.423	85.223	352.771	3.1	侦察
t₄	30	7.000	214.802	137.462	135.203	29.612	3.1	侦察
	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮	⋮
	93	8.600	240.439	8.619	85.272	352.771	3.1	侦察

时刻	目标ID	高度隶属度	距离隶属度	速度隶属度	飞抵时间隶属度	大小隶属度	意图隶属度
t₁	30	0.739 0	0.396 1	0.497 1	0.612 6	0.680 0	0.700 0
	31	0.552 7	0.408 3	0.674 2	0.840 4	0.850 0	0.500 0
	36	0.908 4	0.379 7	0.672 8	0.818 4	0.430 0	0.500 0
	37	0.872 1	0.381 3	0.614 6	0.761 0	0.850 0	0.300 0
	39	0.872 1	0.364 2	0.381 6	0.311 9	0.850 0	0.600 0
	42	0.964 5	0.512 7	0.723 8	0.922 3	0.680 0	0.700 0
	51	0.988 0	0.502 0	0.706 2	0.910 4	0.850 0	0.900 0
	60	0.535 7	0.411 7	0.465 5	0.577 9	0.850 0	0.500 0
	72	0.816 7	0.355 5	0.580 0	0.688 9	0.430 0	0.900 0
	85	1.000 0	0.407 5	0.779 6	0.908 5	0.430 0	0.900 0
	91	0.896 8	0.371 1	0.623 3	0.761 0	0.680 0	0.500 0
	93	0.604 0	0.348 9	0.598 6	0.706 5	0.680 0	0.900 0