A scenario construction and similarity measurement method for navy combat search and rescue

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2020.000064

Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics ›› 2020, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (5): 957-968.doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2020.000064

• Systems Engineering • Previous Articles Next Articles

A scenario construction and similarity measurement method for navy combat search and rescue

Qingsong ZHAO*(), Junyi DING(), Yu GUO(), Peng LIU(), Kewei YANG()

College of Systems Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China

Received:2020-02-07 Online:2020-10-30 Published:2020-10-30
Contact: Qingsong ZHAO E-mail:zhaoqingsong@nudt.edu.cn;Lexi.ding9512@gmail.com;guoyunudt@163.com;liupeng81@nudt.edu.cn;kayyang27@nudt.edu.cn
About author:ZHAO Qingsong was born in 1975. He is a Ph.D. and a professor in National University of Defense Technology. His research interests are system integration, defense acquisition and system of systems architecture design and optimization, and complex system analysis.E-mail: zhaoqingsong@nudt.edu.cn|DING Junyi was born in 1995. She received her M.S. degree from National University of Defense Technology. Her research interests include system of systems modeling and evaluation, network modeling, and temporal constraint resolving.E-mail: Lexi.ding9512@gmail.com|GUO Yu was born in 1993. She is a Ph.D. candidate in National University of Defense Technology. Her research interests are system of systems modeling and optimization, decision making and emergency management.E-mail: guoyunudt@163.com|LIU Peng was born in 1981. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the College of Systems Engineering, National University of Defense Technology. His research interests include system of systems engineering, complex systems, and systems evaluation and optimization.E-mail: liupeng81@nudt.edu.cn|YANG Kewei was born in 1977. He is a Ph.D. and a professor in National University of Defense Technology. His research interests are system of systems (SoS) requirements modeling, SoS architecture design and optimization, and system modeling and simulation.E-mail: kayyang27@nudt.edu.cn
Supported by:
the National Natural Science Foundation of China(71571185);the National Key Research and Development Project of China(2017YFC1405006);This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71571185) and the National Key Research and Development Project of China (2017YFC1405006)

Abstract

Abstract:

Navy combat search and rescue (NCSAR) is an important component of the modern maritime warfare and the scenario of NCSAR is the basis for decision makers to rely on. According to the core elements in the NCSAR process, the NCSAR scenario structure is constructed from seven perspectives based on the multi-view architecture framework. According to the NCSAR scenarios evolution over time, the NCSAR scenario sequence is analyzed and modeled based on the concept lattice method. Then, the incremental construction algorithm of the NCSAR scenario sequence lattice is given. On this basis, the similarity measurement index of NCSAR scenarios is defined, and the similarity measurement model of NCSAR scenarios is proposed. Finally, the rationality of the method is verified by an example analysis. The NCSAR scenario and similarity measurement method proposed can provide scientific guidance for rapid making, dynamic adjustment and implementation of the NCSAR program, and thus improve the efficiency and effectiveness of NCSAR.

Key words: navy combat search and rescue (NCSAR), scenario, similarity, measurement, concept lattice

Qingsong ZHAO, Junyi DING, Yu GUO, Peng LIU, Kewei YANG. A scenario construction and similarity measurement method for navy combat search and rescue[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(5): 957-968.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig 1

Fig 2

Table 1

Multi-view products of NCSAR scenario"

View	Product	Description	Level range of scenario factors
Personnel view (PV)	Personnel importance PV1	Describe the importance of SAR objects, which are classified into primary, intermediate and advanced ones, indicating that the level of importance of SAR objects is getting higher and higher.	$l_1$: primary
			$l_2$: intermediate
			$l_3$: advanced
	Personnel injury situation PV2	Describe the injury situation of the SAR objects, classified into severely injured, light injured and not injured.	$l_1$: not injured
			$l_2$: lightly injured
			$l_3$: severely injured
Time view (TV)	SAR time TV1	Describe the time property when the SAR occurs, divided into two types: wartime and peacetime. For the SAR at wartime, the decider should take the threat from enemy into consideration.	$l_1$: peacetime
	SAR time TV1		$l_2$: wartime
	SAR period TV2	Describe the period property when the SAR occurs, divided into day and night.	$l_1$: day
	SAR period TV2		$l_2$: night
Spatial view (SV)	Distance to land SV1	Describe the distance from the SAR position to land, classified into offshore and distant sea.	$l_1$: offshore
	Distance to land SV1		$l_2$: distant sea
	Combat area SV2	Describe whether the SAR position is in the combat area or not.	$l_1$: non-combat zone
	Combat area SV2		$l_2$: combat zone
Circumstance view (CV)	Sea temperature CV1	Describe the sea temperature which helps to judge the life span and formulate the SAR plan. According to the influence sea temperature exerts on human life span, divide it into three levels: under 4${^\circ}$C, 4${^\circ}$C to 10${^\circ}$C and above 10${^\circ}$C.	$l_1$: above 10${^\circ}$C
			$l_2$: $4{^\circ}$C to 10${^\circ}$C
			$l_3$: under 4${^\circ}$C
	Wave height CV2	Describe the wave height which helps to judge the life span and formulate the SAR plan, and divide it into low, medium and high.	$l_1$: low, wave height 0-2.5 m
			$l_2$: medium, wave height 2.5-6.0 m
			$l_3$: high, wave height$>$6.0 m
	Wind speed CV3	Describe the wind speed which helps to judge the life span and formulate the SAR plan, and divide it into low, medium and high.	$l_1$: low, wind speed 0-10.7 m/s
			$l_2$: medium, wind speed 10.8-20.7 m/s
			$l_3$: high, wind speed$>$20.7 m/s
	Visibility CV4	Describe the visibility which helps to judge the life span and formulate the SAR plan, and divide it into good, medium and bad.	$l_1$: good, no precipitation or light rain, clear air
			$l_2$: medium, heavy rain, light fog or moderate rain
			$l_3$: poor, dense fog, heavy fog or heavy rain
Equipment view (EV)	Location device EV1	Describe whether the SAR object carries positioning equipment. The situation is divided into yes and no.	$l_1$: yes
	Location device EV1		$l_2$: no
	Rescue equipment EV2	Describe whether the SAR object carries rescue equipment. According to the condition of rescue equipment, the situation is divided into none, primary and advanced.	$l_1$: advanced, life rafts, non-powered ships, life-saving kits, etc., rescued personnel from the seawater immersion environment, able to carry out general self-help
			$l_2$: primary, simple life-saving equipment such as life jackets, lifebuoys, life-saving kits, etc., the rescued personnel are still in seawater immersion, able to conduct simple self-rescue
			$l_3$: none, no rescue equipment carried
Threat view (THV)	Hostile threat THV1	Describe whether there will be hostile threat during the SAR activity or not.	$l_1$: no
Threat view (THV)	Hostile threat THV1		$l_2$: yes

Table 1

Fig 3

Table 2

Table 3

Fig 4

Fig 5

Table 4

Fig 6

Fig 7

Fig 8

References 31

1	International Maritime Organization. International aeronautical and maritime search and rescue manual. London: Ashford Press, 1999.
2	KANG E J, MIN W, CHOO H S, et al. Design of a very high frequency stretchable inverted conical helical antenna for maritime search and rescue applications. Microwave and Optical Technology Letters, 2020, 62 (1): 284- 288. doi: 10.1002/mop.32004
3	KARAHALIOS H. The severity of shipboard communication failures in maritime emergencies: a risk management approach. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2018, 28, 1- 9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.02.015
4	STONE L D, KELLER C M, KRATZKE T M, et al. Search for the wreckage of air France flight AF 447. Statistical Science, 2014, 29 (1): 69- 80. doi: 10.1214/13-STS420
5	BRUSHETT B A, ALLEN A A, KING B A, et al. Application of leeway drift data to predict the drift of panga skiffs: case study of maritime search and rescue in the tropical pacific. Applied Ocean Research, 2017, 67 (9): 109- 124.
6	Department of the Navy. NTTP 3-50.1: navy search and rescue (SAR) manual. http://www.public.navy.mil/airfor/srss/Docume-nts/PUBS/.
7	United States Joint Chiefs of Staff. Joint publication 3-50: personnel recovery. https://www.militarydictionary.org/source/per-sonnel-recovery.
8	ZHANG K, HAO G Z, TIAN Y F, et al. Evaluation model of maritime search and rescue response capability. Proc. of the 5th International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety, 2019, 155- 160.
9	KARATAS M, RAZI N, GUNAL M. An ILP and simulation model to optimize search and rescue helicopter operation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2017, 68 (9): 1335- 1351.
10	ZHU Y. Maritime search and rescue. Dalian: Dalian Maritime University Press, 2017.
11	LIANG Y, BAO J S, HU X F, et al. A heuristic project scheduling approach for quick response to maritime disaster rescue. International Journal of Project Management, 2009, 27 (6): 620- 628. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.10.001
12	KRATZKE T M, STONE L D, FROST J R. Search and rescue optimal planning system. Proc. of the 13th International Conference on Information Fusion, 2011, 1- 8.
13	GUO Y, YE Y Q, YANG Q Q, et al. A multi-objective INLP model of sustainable resource allocation for long-range maritime search and rescue. Sustainability, 2019, 11 (3): 1- 25.
14	OTOTE D A, LI B S, AI B, et al. A decision-making algorithm for maritime search and rescue plan. Sustainability, 2019, 11 (7): 1- 16.
15	KIM Y D, SON G J, KIM H K, et al. Smart disaster response in vehicular tunnels: technologies for search and rescue applications. Sustainability, 2018, 10 (7): 1- 25.
16	LI X, FU J, DONG F, et al. Formal information representation for tactical reconnaissance system organization model. Studies in Informatics and Control, 2012, 21 (3): 325- 332.
17	SONG Z J, WANG H, ZHAO H M, et al. Method and application for multi-scenario hybrid risk decision making based on utility-risk entropy. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2018, 40 (12): 2751- 2757.
18	LI X, PU W, ZHAO X D, et al. Agent action diagram: toward a model for emergency management system. Simulation Mo-delling Practice and Theory, 2019, 94, 66- 99. doi: 10.1016/j.simpat.2019.02.004
19	CHEN Y H, WANG H, SONG Z J. Dynamic adjustment for emergency decision-making based on utility risk entropy. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2016, 38 (9): 2093- 2098.
20	PALTRINIERI N, DECHY N, SALZANO E, et al. Towards a new approach for the identification of atypical accident scena-rios. Journal of Risk Research, 2013, 16 (3/4): 337- 354.
21	HILTUNEN E. Scenarios: process and outcome. Journal of Futures Studies, 2009, 13 (3): 151- 152.
22	GODET M. Forefront: how to be rigorous with scenario planning. Foresight, 2000, 2 (1): 5- 9. doi: 10.1108/14636680010802438
23	FAVATO G, VECCHIATO R. Embedding real options in scenario planning: a new methodological approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2017, 124 (12): 135- 149.
24	KAHN H, WIENER A. The year 2000: a framework for speculation on the next thirty-three years. New York: MacMillan, 1967.
25	OLIVER J J, PARRETT E. Managing future uncertainty: reevaluating the role of scenario planning. Business Horizons, 2018, 61 (2): 339- 352. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2017.11.013
26	ZHANG P L, YANG K W, DONG Y J. Scenario-based approach for project portfolio selection in army engineering and manufacturing development. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2016, 27 (1): 166- 176.
27	GERSHUNY J. The choice of scenarios. Futures, 1976, 8 (6): 496- 508. doi: 10.1016/0016-3287(76)90076-8
28	SCHNAARS S P. How to develop and use scenarios. Long Range Planning, 1987, 20 (1): 105- 114. doi: 10.1016/0024-6301(87)90038-0
29	PALTRINIERI N, WILDAY J, WARDAMAN M, et al. Surface installations intended for carbon capture and sequestration: atypical accident scenarios and their identification. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2014, 92 (1): 93- 107. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2013.08.004
30	ZHANG M H, SHE L, GENG B. Research on the similarity of the structured emergency events based on scenario. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2017, 25 (1): 151- 159.
31	JABAR M, AHMADI R, SHAFAZAND Y, et al. An automated method for requirement determination and structuring based on 5W1H elements. Proc. of the 4th Conference on Control and System Graduate Research Colloquium, 2013, 32- 37.

Parameter		Value
Time		$[t^0, t^1]$	$[t^1, t^2]$	$[t^2, t^3]$	$[t^3, t^4]$	$[t^4, t^5]$	$[t^5, t^6]$
Scenario		$s_1 $	$s_2 $	$s_3$	$s_4 $	$s_5 $	$s_6 $
	PV1-$v_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_3 $	$l_3 $
	PV2-$v_2 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_3 $	$l_3 $
	TV1-$v_3 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $
	TV2-$v_4 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $
	SV1-$v_5 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $
	SV2-$v_6 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $
Factor	CV1-$v_7 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_3 $	$l_2 $
	CV2-$v_8 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_3 $	$l_3 $
	CV3-$v_9 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_3 $	$l_3 $
	CV4-$v_{10} $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_3 $	$l_3 $
	EV1-$v_{11} $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $
	EV2-$v_{12} $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $
	THV1-$v_{13} $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_2 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $	$l_1 $

Time interval	$[t^0, t^1]$	$[t^1, t^2]$	$[t^2, t^3]$	$[t^3, t^4]$	$[t^4, t^5]$	$[t^5, t^6]$
$[t^0, t^1]$	1	0.83	0.73	0.69	0.55	0.57
$[t^1, t^2]$	0.9	1	0.8	0.76	0.62	0.58
$[t^2, t^3]$	0.9	0.9	1	0.86	0.73	0.75
$[t^3, t^4]$	0.83	0.83	0.83	1	0.76	0.78
$[t^4, t^5]$	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.9	1	0.9
$[t^5, t^6]$	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.9	0.88	1

Time interval	$[t^0, t^2]$	$[t^2, t^4]$	$[t^4, t^6]$
$[t^0, t^2]$	1	0.5	0.5
$[t^2, t^4]$	0.63	1	0.55
$[t^4, t^6]$	0.6	0.68	1

[1]	Bing WANG, Pengfei ZHANG, Yufeng HE, Xiaozhi WANG, Xianxia ZHANG. Scenario-oriented hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm for robust economic dispatch of power system with wind power [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(5): 1143-1150.
[2]	Keyi LI, Zhengkun GUO, Gongjian ZHOU. State estimation in range coordinate using range-only measurements [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(3): 497-510.
[3]	Liting SUN, Xiang WANG, Zhitao HUANG. Unintentional modulation microstructure enlargement [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(3): 522-533.
[4]	Minghui SHA, Erke MAO, Kang ZHANG. Polarization-space joint mainlobe jamming countermeasure technique based on divided dimensions [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(3): 594-599.
[5]	Shengming XU, Shan LU, Yueyang HOU, Shengxian SHI. Accurate 3D geometry measurement for non-cooperative spacecraft with an unfocused light-field camera [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33(1): 11-21.
[6]	Yaowei ZHU, Zhaobin XU, Xiaojun JIN, Xiaoxu GUO, Zhonghe JIN. Integrated method for measuring distance and time difference between small satellites [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 32(3): 596-606.
[7]	Han PENG, Ting CHENG, Xi LI. De-correlated unbiased sequential filtering based on best unbiased linear estimation for target tracking in Doppler radar [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(6): 1167-1177.
[8]	Zhibin ZHANG, Haibo JI, Jie YANG. Autonomous optical navigation of Mars probe aided by one-way Doppler measurements in capture stage [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(3): 602-611.
[9]	Zezhou WANG, Yunxiang CHEN, Zhongyi CAI, Yangjun GAO, Lili WANG. Methods for predicting the remaining useful life of equipment in consideration of the random failure threshold [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(2): 415-431.
[10]	Mengmeng ZHANG, Honghui CHEN, Yi MAO, Aimin LUO. An approach to measuring business-IT alignment maturity via DoDAF2.0 [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(1): 95-108.
[11]	Zhongyi CAI, Zezhou WANG, Yunxiang CHEN, Jiansheng GUO, Huachun XIANG. Remaining useful lifetime prediction for equipment based on nonlinear implicit degradation modeling [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31(1): 194-205.
[12]	Xiaotian WANG, Kai ZHANG, Jie YAN. Complexity estimation of image sequence for automatic target track [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30(4): 672-683.
[13]	Hongwei ZHANG, Weixin XIE. Constrained auxiliary particle filtering for bearings-only maneuvering target tracking [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30(4): 684-695.
[14]	Haiwen SUN, Xiaofang XIE. Threat evaluation method of warships formation air defense based on AR(p)-DITOPSIS [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30(2): 297-307.
[15]	Boyuan XIA, Qingsong ZHAO, Kewei YANG, Yajie DOU, Zhiwei YANG. Scenario-based modeling and solving research on robust weapon project planning problems [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30(1): 85-99.

A scenario construction and similarity measurement method for navy combat search and rescue

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

Share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 31

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments