無人機(jī)分布式集群態(tài)勢感知模型研究

高楊; 李東生; 程澤新

doi:10.11999/JEIT170877

無人機(jī)分布式集群態(tài)勢感知模型研究

doi: 10.11999/JEIT170877

基金項(xiàng)目:

國家自然科學(xué)基金(61179036)，國防科技創(chuàng)新特區(qū)基金(17-163-11-ZT-004-014-02)

計(jì)量
- 文章訪問數(shù): 4745
- HTML全文瀏覽量: 953
- PDF下載量: 1032
- 被引次數(shù): 0
出版歷程
- 收稿日期: 2017-09-18
- 修回日期: 2018-01-10
- 刊出日期: 2018-06-19

UAV Distributed Swarm Situation Awareness Model

Funds:

The National Natural Science Foundation of China (61179036), The National Defense Technology Innovation Special Zone Foundation of China (17-163-11-ZT-004-014-02)

摘要

摘要: 以無人機(jī)(UAV)為代表的無人系統(tǒng)分布式集群作戰(zhàn)是未來戰(zhàn)斗力的增長點(diǎn)，集群態(tài)勢感知是集群作戰(zhàn)的重要環(huán)節(jié)。該文在典型態(tài)勢感知模型的基礎(chǔ)上，從理論模型、態(tài)勢感知一致性、評價方法等方面，對無人機(jī)分布式集群態(tài)勢感知展開研究。將基于動態(tài)系統(tǒng)的Endsley1995態(tài)勢感知(SA)模型中的心智模型修改為人機(jī)智能模型，得到無人機(jī)個體的態(tài)勢感知模型；基于團(tuán)體SA和分布式SA(DSA)理論，按照無人機(jī)集群類型，分別設(shè)計(jì)同構(gòu)和異構(gòu)無人機(jī)集群SA模型；對無人機(jī)集群SA中的一致性問題和評價問題進(jìn)行分析，給出同構(gòu)無人機(jī)集群SA的一致性形成過程，異構(gòu)無人機(jī)集群SA的一致性判斷方法和無人機(jī)集群SA評價方法的選擇流程。分析表明，建立的集群態(tài)勢感知模型符合集群協(xié)同作戰(zhàn)特點(diǎn)，有一定的積極意義。
- 無人機(jī)集群 /
- 集群態(tài)勢感知 /
- 分布式態(tài)勢感知 /
- 一致性
Abstract: The distributed swarm operation of unmanned systems represented by Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is the growth point of the future war, and the swarm situation awareness is an important part. Based on the typical situation awareness model, the distributed swarm situation awareness of UAV is studied. Firstly, in the individual level, the mental model in the dynamic system of the Endsley1995 Situation Awareness (SA) model is modified as a human-computer intelligent model. Then in accordance with the UAV swarm type, isomorphic and heterogeneous, based on the team SA and Distributed SA (DSA) theory, the UAV swarm SA model are built. Then, the consensus and evaluation problems of UAV Swarm SA are analyzed. The consensus formation process of isomorphic UAV swarm SA and the consensus judgment method of heterogeneous UAV swarm SA are given. And the choice of UAV swarm SA evaluation method is analyzed. The analysis shows that the proposed swarm situation awareness model is corresponding to the swarm cooperative combat characteristics and has certain positive significance.
- Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) swarm /
- Swarm situation awareness /
- Distributed Situation Awareness (DSA) /
- Consensus

HTML全文

參考文獻(xiàn)(34)

余淮, 楊文. 一種無人機(jī)航拍影像快速特征提取與匹配算法[J]. 電子與信息學(xué)報, 2016, 38(3): 509-516. doi: 10.11999/ JEIT150676.

YU Huai and YANG Wen. A fast feature extraction and matching algorithm for unmanned aerial vehicle images[J]. Journal of Electronics Information Technology, 2016, 38(3): 509-516. doi: 10.11999/JEIT150676.

SOREBSEN L J, STANTON N A, and BANKS A P. Back to SA school: Contrasting three approaches to situation awareness in the cockpit[J]. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2011, 12(6): 451-471.

ENDSLEY M R. Designing for Situation Awareness: An Approach to User-centered Design[M]. Boca Raton, USA, CRC Press, 2016: 13-28.

CHIAPPER D L, RORIE R C, MORGAN C A, et al. A situated approach to the acquisition of shared SA in team contexts[J]. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2014, 15(1): 69-87.

STANTON N A, STEWART R, HARRIS D, et al. Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: Theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology[J]. Ergonomics, 2006, 49(12/13): 1288-1311.

STANTON N A, SALMON P M, WALKER G H, et al. State-of-science: Situation awareness in individuals, teams and systems[J]. Ergonomics, 2017, 60(4): 449-466.

SALAS E, SIMS D E, and BURKE C S. Is there a big five in teams work?[J]. Small Group Research, 2005, 36(5): 555-599.

SALAS E, SHUFFER M L, THAYER A L, et al. Understanding and improving teams work in organizations: A scientifically based practical guide[J]. Human Resource Management, 2015, 54(4): 599-622.

SANER L D, BOLSTAD C A, GONZALEZ C, et al. Measuring and predicting shared situation awareness in teams[J]. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2009, 3(3): 280-308.

KOKAR M M and ENDSLEY M R. Situation awareness and cognitive modeling[J]. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2012, 27(3): 91-96.

PLANT K L and STANTON N A. Distributed cognition in Search and Rescue: Loosely coupled tasks and tightly coupled roles[J]. Ergonomics, 2016, 59(10): 1353-1376.

SORENSEN L J and STANTON N A. Inter-rater reliability and content validity of network analysis as a method for measuring distributed situation awareness[J]. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2016, 17(1): 42-63.

張東戈, 孟輝, 趙慧赟. 態(tài)勢感知水平的解析化度量模型[J]. 系統(tǒng)工程與電子技術(shù), 2016, 38(8): 1808-1815. doi: 10.3969/ j.issn.1001-506X.2016.08.15.

ZHANG Dongge, MENG Hui, and ZHAO Huiyun. Analytical measurement model of situation awareness [J]. System Engineering and Electronics, 2016, 38(8): 1808-1815. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-506X.2016.08.15.

黃匆, 陶九陽, 張東戈, 等. 分布式態(tài)勢感知一致性分析與度量方法研究[J]. 指揮控制與仿真, 2014, 36(3): 1-8. doi: 10.3969 /j.issn.1673-3819. 2014.03.001.

HUANG Cong, TAO Jiuyang, ZHANG Dongge, et al. Analyzing and measuring approach on the consensus of distributed situation awareness[J]. Command Control Simulation, 2014, 36(3): 1-8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-3819. 2014.03.001.

羅愛民, 劉俊先, 劉剛. 基于SEA 的戰(zhàn)場態(tài)勢一致性評估方法[J]. 火力與指揮控制, 2013, 38(2): 40-44.

LUO Aimin, LIU Junxian, and LIU Gang. An evaluation method of situation consistency based on SEA[J]. Fire Control Command Control, 2013, 38(2): 40-44.

喬正偉, 羊彥, 侯靜. 戰(zhàn)場態(tài)勢感知系統(tǒng)評價方法[J]. 指揮控制與仿真, 2016, 38(5): 47-51. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-3819. 2016.05.009.

QIAO Zhengwei, YANG Yan, and HOU Jing. Evaluation methods of battlefield situational awareness system[J]. Command Control Simulation, 2016, 38(5): 47-51. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-3819.2016.05.009.

ENDSLEY M R. Final reflections situation awareness models and measures[J]. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2015, 9(1): 101-111.

ENDSLEY M R. Situation awareness misconceptions and misunderstandings[J]. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2015, 9(1): 4-32.

STANTON N A. Distributed situation awareness[J]. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2016, 17(1): 1-7.

SAMON P M, WALKER G H, and STANTON N A. Broken components versus broken systems: Why it is systems not people that lose situation awareness[J]. Cognition, Technology Work, 2015, 17(2): 179-183.

KALLONIATIS A, ALI I, NEVILLE T, et al. The Situation Awareness Weighted Network (SAWN) model and method: Theory and application[J]. Applied Ergonomics, 2017, 61(5): 178-196.

ENDSLEY M R and ROBERTSON M M. Situation awareness in aircraft maintenance teams[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2000, 26(2): 301-325.

SHU Y and FURUTA K. An inference method of teams situation awareness based on mutual awareness[J]. Cognition, Technology Work, 2005, 7(4): 272-287.

D,ANIELLO G, LOIA V, and ORUIUOLI F. A multi-agent fuzzy consensus model in a situation awareness framework[J]. Applied Soft Computing, 2015, 30(5): 430-440.

CHICLANA F, HERRERA-VIEDMA E, HERRERA F, et al. Some induced ordered weighted averaging operators and their use for solving group decision- making problems based on fuzzy preference relations[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2007, 182(1): 383-399.

SORENSEN L J and STANTON N A. Keeping it together: The role of transactional situation awareness in teams performance[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2016, 53(5): 267-273.

孟輝, 張東戈. 連續(xù)態(tài)勢變化條件下態(tài)勢感知速度模型[J]. 系統(tǒng)工程與電子技術(shù), 2009, 31(12): 2909-2913.

MENG Hui and ZHANG Dongge. Situational awareness velocity model under continuous change conditions[J]. System Engineering and Electronics, 2009, 31(12): 2909-2913.

STANTON N A and HARVEY C. Beyond human error taxonomies in assessment of risk in sociotechnical systems: A new paradigm with the EAST broken-links approach[J]. Ergonomics, 2017, 60(2): 221-233.

相關(guān)文章

施引文獻(xiàn)

資源附件(0)

訪問統(tǒng)計(jì)