Dynamic Battle Management Using Meta-Heuristic Algorithms, Fuzzy Inference Systems and the Decision Tree

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Academy of Artificial Intelligence and New Technologies, Tehran, Iran

2 School of Computer Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.

3 Faculty of Management, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Nowadays, the threats caused by aerial targets are among the most critical challenges. Two main components in threat management are visualization and decision-making based on compiled pictures. In this process, the decisions are made based on threat evaluation and resource allocation modelling. To do so, the sequential nature of resource allocation is considered to provide a more accurately visualized situation. Here, a multi-stage multi-objective model is constructed based on the fuzzy inference system and the decision tree. Also, NSGA-II and SPEA-II are used to find Pareto solutions. Both Algorithms have been compared based on generational distance as a convergence measure, spread as a diversity measure, and the actual computational time. Ultimately, the TOPSIS method is used to make the final decision while the results are reported using a simulated scenario. The simulation results show that the SPEA-II has better convergence and spread, while NSGA-II is faster and has less standard deviation in the execution time. We believe that the fuzzy inference system is more suitable than the decision tree in practical applications. Nevertheless, when facing data shortage or incompatibility, the decision tree would be the preferred choice.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Smiley face

  1. Naseem, A.; Shah, S. T. H.; Khan, S. A.; Malik, A. W. “Decision Support System for Optimum Decision Making Process in Threat Evaluation and Weapon Assignment: Current Status, Challenges and Future Directions”; Annu. Rev. Control. 2017, 43, 169–187.
  2. Manne, A. S. “A Target-Assignment Problem”; Oper. Res. 1958, 6, 346–351.
  3. Ejaz, W.; Sharma, S. K.; Saadat, S.; Naeem, M.; Chughtai, N. A. “A Comprehensive Survey on Resource Allocation for CRAN in 5G and Beyond Networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications”; J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2020, 16, 102638.
  4. Ghanbari, A. A.; Alaei, H.; Mohammadnia, M. “A Multi-Stage Modelling Approche for Allocation of Defense Resources to Invading Targets”; Adv. Defence Sci. & Technol. 2020, 2, 167-173 (In Persian).
  5. Rudek, R.; Heppner, L. “Efficient Algorithms for Discrete Resource Allocation Problems under Degressively Proportional Constraints”; Expert Syst. Appl. 2020, 149, 113293.
  6. Hocaoğlu, M. F. “Weapon Target Assignment Optimization for Land Based Multi-Air Defense Systems: A Goal Programming Approach”; Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019, 128, 681-689.
  7. Hosein, P. A.; Athans, M. “Preferential Defense Strategies. Part II: The Dynamic Case”; Cambridge (US): MIT Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems, Report No.: LIDS-P 2003.Technical Report, 1990.
  8. Gülpınar, N.; Çanakoğlu, E.; Branke, J. “Heuristics for the Stochastic Dynamic Task-resource Allocation Problem with Retry Opportunities”; Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2018, 266, 291-303.
  9. Davis, M. T.; Robbins, M. J.; Lunday, B. J. “Approximate Dynamic Programming For Missile Defense Interceptor Fire Control”; Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 259, 873-886.
  10. Kalyanam, K.; Rathinam. S.; Casbeer, D.; Pachter, M. “Optimal Threshold Policy for Sequential Weapon Target Assignment”; IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016, 49, 7-10.
  11. Ahner, D. K.; Parson, C. R. “Optimal Multi-Stage Allocation of Weapons to Targets Using Adaptive Dynamic Programming”; Optim. Lett. 2015, 9, 1689-1701.
  12. Ghanbari, A. A.; Alaei, H. “Meta-Heuristic Algorithms for Resource Management in Crisis Based on OWA Approach”; Appl Intell. Appl Intell 51, 646-657 (2021).
  13. Kline, A. G.; Ahner, D. K.; Hill, R. “The Weapon-Target Assignment Problem”; Comput. Oper. Res. 2019, 105, 226-236.
  14. Chachi, J.; Taheri, S. M.; Arghami, N. R. “A Hybrid Fuzzy Regression Model and its Applicationin Hydrology Engineering”; Appl. Soft Comput. 2014, 25, 149-158.
  15. Ross, T. J. “Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Application Second Edition”; Wiely, Singapore, 2005.
  16. Dahan, H.; Cohen, S.; Rokach, L.; Maimon, O. “Proactive Data Mining with Decision Trees”; Springer-Verlag, New York, 2014.
  17. Hwang, C. L.; Yoon, K. “Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications”; CRC Press, 2011.
  18. Runqvist, A. “Threat Evaluation. An Application for Air Surveillance Systems”; Master’s Thesis, Uppsala University, 2004.
  19. Kong, D.; Chang, T.; Wang, Q.; Sun, H.; Dai, W. “A Threat Assessment Method of Group Targets Based on Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Multi-Attribute Group Decision-Making”; Appl. Soft Comput. 2018, 67, 350-369.
  20. Lee, H.; Choi, B. J.; Kim, C. O.; Kim, J. S.; Kim, J. E. “Threat Evaluation of Enemy Air Fighters via Neural Network-Based Markov Chain Modeling”; Knowl Based Syst. 2017, 116, 49-57.
  21. Johansson, F. “Evaluating the Performance of TEWA Systems”; Ph.D Thesis, University of Skövde, Skövde, 2010.
  22. Liu, B.; Zhu, Q.; Zhu, H. “Trajectory Optimization and Resource Allocation for UAV-Assisted Relaying Communications”; Wirel. Netw. 2020, 26, 739-749.
  23. Bogdanowicz, Z. R.; Tolano, A.; Patel, K.; Coleman, N. P. “Optimization of Weapon–Target Pairings Based on Kill Probabilities”; IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2013, 43, 1835-1844.
  24. Coello, C. A. C.; Lamont, G. B.; Veldhuizen, D. A. V. “Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems Second Edition”; Springer, New York, 2007.
  25. Deb, K.; Pratap, A.; Agarwal, S.; Meyarivan, T. “A Fast and Elitist Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm: NSGA-II”; IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2002, 6, 182-197.
  26. Zitzler, E.; Thiele, L. “Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: A Comparative Case Study and the Strength Pareto Approach”; IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 1999, 3, 257-271.
  27. Curry, D. M.; Dagli, C. H. “Computational Complexity Measures for Many-objective Optimization Problems”; Procedia Comput. Sci. 2014, 36, 185-191
  28. Laszczyk, M.; Myszkowski, P. B. “Survey of Quality Measures for Multi-Objective Optimization: Construction of Complementary Set of Multi-objective Quality Measures”; Swarm Evol. Comput. 2019, 48, 109-133.