A method for generating optimal and feasible solutions for measured solutions based on multiple declared values

Abstract

This application belongs to the technical field of vehicle inspection and certification, and specifically relates to a method for generating optimal solutions and feasible solutions for actual measurement schemes for multiple registered declared values, including: logically correlating and classifying parameters according to enterprise registered information to form an entry system, and obtaining project configuration information based on the preset logic of the entry system and in combination with binding relationships; screening project configurations that cannot be covered by the deemed report, integrating these configurations that need to be measured, and only retaining the parameters involved in the measured items and the parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the results to form the final measured analysis configuration, and gradually combining and analyzing to find the measured solution that best meets the requirements; traversing other entries to generate a complete measured configuration. This application solves the technical problem of how vehicle manufacturers can quickly and efficiently formulate the best testing plan for registered parameters and existing deemed reports.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of vehicle inspection and certification, and in particular, relates to a method for generating optimal solutions and feasible solutions for actual measurement schemes for multiple filing declaration values. Background Art

[0002] In the field of vehicle testing and certification, current vehicle models need to go through a strict testing and certification process when applying for announcement qualifications or operating qualifications. Automobile manufacturers must submit a complete testing plan covering all test items to the testing agency to ensure that the vehicle meets the relevant national and industry standards. Different testing items require companies to provide detailed information related to vehicle filing parameters. When there are multiple declared values ​​for filing parameters, a variety of vehicle model configurations will be formed. These vehicle model configurations must be supported by corresponding test reports. These reports can be obtained through actual testing of the model's prototype, or by using reports of other models that have passed the test as deemed data.

[0003] In the existing technology, enterprise applicants need to manually organize and analyze the relationship between vehicle configuration and test items to determine which items can be deemed equivalent, which items must be tested, and the number and configuration of sample vehicles required for each test item. However, due to the different filing parameters required for each test item and the diverse combinations of parameters, enterprises often need to consume a lot of manpower and time to develop a complete test plan. This not only increases the workload of enterprises, but also easily leads to omissions or errors due to manual operations, which in turn affects the test efficiency and the progress of vehicle qualification certification.

[0004] Therefore, the prior art has the following deficiencies:

[0005] 1. Low work efficiency: Due to the diverse configurations of vehicle models and the numerous inspection items, manual analysis of each inspection item is time-consuming and has low work efficiency.

[0006] 2. Errors are likely to occur: Manually organizing and calculating the correspondence between vehicle configuration and test items is prone to omissions or errors, affecting the integrity of the test plan.

[0007] 3. Insufficient optimization of sample vehicle configuration: When determining the specific configuration and test items of each sample vehicle, it is impossible to optimize them through fast and effective means, resulting in increased testing costs.

[0008] Based on the above problems, there is an urgent need for a more efficient and automated method to assist companies in formulating complete testing plans for vehicle models. Summary of the invention

[0009] In view of the defects of the prior art, the present invention proposes a method for generating optimal solutions and feasible solutions for actual measurement schemes for multiple registered declared values, which can reduce manpower input, optimize sample vehicle configuration, improve detection efficiency, and ensure that the vehicle successfully passes qualification certification.

[0010] The present invention provides a method for generating an optimal solution and a feasible solution of a measured solution for multiple registered declared values, the method comprising:

[0011] Step 1: Based on the enterprise filing information, logically associate and classify the parameters to generate several items, and generate the corresponding item configuration according to the preset logic of each item. Based on the binding relationship between the item configuration required for the test item and the parameter declaration value provided by the enterprise, generate the corresponding project configuration for each item;

[0012] Step 2: Determine whether the project provides a deemed report based on the test plan. If there is no report, all project configurations of the project need to be tested. If there is a report, select the configurations that cannot be covered by the deemed report for testing, and record the configurations that need to be tested as the measured analysis configurations of the project.

[0013] Step 3: Integrate the configurations that need to be measured and analyzed for each project. In the results of this integration, only the parameter information related to the measured project is retained. On this basis, further screening is performed to retain the parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the screening results, and then the results are deduplicated to obtain the final measured analysis configuration;

[0014] Step 4: Analyze the number of configurations. If there is only one configuration, it is the optimal solution. All measured items are measured by this configuration. If there are multiple configurations, they need to be combined and analyzed step by step to find the most reasonable measurement solution.

[0015] Step 5: Traverse all entries and determine whether there are intersection parameters between the measured configuration and the entry. If there are intersection parameters, it is necessary to find the corresponding intersection configuration, select which intersection configuration the actual sample vehicle belongs to, and integrate the selected intersection configuration into the actual configuration obtained in step 4; if there are no intersection parameters, select which entry configuration the actual sample vehicle belongs to according to the configuration of the corresponding entry, and integrate the selected entry configuration into the actual configuration obtained in step 4 until a complete measured configuration containing all parameters is generated.

[0016] In a preferred implementation, further, step 1 includes:

[0017] Generate project configuration according to the items involved in the project. According to the parameters involved in the project, determine which items these parameters are related to. Arrange and combine the item configurations of the items involved to form the initial configuration of each project. Traverse each binding relationship in turn to determine whether the initial configuration of the project involves the corresponding binding relationship. If so, eliminate the configurations that do not meet the requirements according to the binding relationship. In the results after elimination, filter and retain the parameters related to the project. In the filtered results, perform deduplication processing to obtain the project configuration of each project.

[0018] In the preferred implementation, further, the process of obtaining the final measured analysis configuration in step 3 includes: determining which items the measured items are related to, arranging and combining the item configurations of these items to form an initial measured analysis configuration, screening the configurations that need to be measured in each measured item based on the initial measured analysis configuration, merging the results after screening each item, and then retaining all parameters related to the measured items in the obtained merged results, and on this basis, further screening and retaining parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the results, and then deduplicating to obtain the final measured analysis configuration.

[0019] In a preferred implementation, further, step 4 includes:

[0020] Step 4.1: Analyze the number of measured analysis configurations. If there is only one configuration, it means that only one prototype is needed. The prototype can meet the testing requirements by completing all the measured items. At this time, there is an optimal solution.

[0021] Step 4.2: If there are multiple configurations, assuming the number of configurations is n, you need to analyze different configuration combinations step by step, starting from configuration number 1 to n configurations, and evaluate each combination in turn to find the most reasonable measured configuration solution.

[0022] In a preferred implementation, further, the process of analyzing the selected configuration combinations in sequence in step 4.2 includes:

[0023] Step 4.2.1 Traverse these n configurations and analyze the actual measured situation of the i-th configuration in each project one by one, so as to obtain a set result. This set result includes how many configurations in different projects can be regarded as the measured configuration when any configuration is measured.

[0024] Step 4.2.2: From the combination Select i configurations from the n optional configurations for combination analysis, select a combination, analyze each test item in turn, evaluate whether the combination meets the project requirements, and gradually select configurations that meet the requirements;

[0025] Step 4.2.3: For each measured item, the combination is gradually selected from i configurations. Assume that j configurations are selected each time, and the selected configurations are ①, ②… In step 4.2.1, we already know that when configuration ① is measured, there are several configuration sets X1 that can be regarded as configuration ①, and when configuration ② is measured, there are several configuration sets X2 that can be regarded as configuration ②, and so on. In actual measurement, there are several configuration sets Xj that can be regarded as configurations , if the union of X1, X2…Xj is these n configurations, it means that the combination of the selected j configurations is valid for this project, starting from 1, and , then there are There are many combinations that need to be analyzed;

[0026] Step 4.2.4: Analyze the current test items Combination, when There are x in the combination When there are j combinations, if all of these j configurations need to be measured, and the remaining nj configurations can all be regarded as the j configurations, then the combination selected for the current test item is valid; when j=i, if all of the i configurations need to be measured, and the remaining ni configurations cannot all be regarded as the i configurations, then the i configuration combination selected in step 5.3.1 is invalid. At this time, it is necessary to analyze the situation of the next i value (i value is automatically +1), and repeat step 4.2.2 for analysis;

[0027] Step 4.2.5: Traverse all measured items in turn and analyze according to steps 4.2.3 and 4.2.4. If each measured item can be found in i configuration combinations kind The combination of configurations makes When the configuration is measured, the remaining n- If all configurations can be regarded as equivalent, the selected configuration combination is determined to be valid;

[0028] Step 4.2.6: When the selected configuration combination is valid, and , When the minimum values ​​are obtained respectively, the solution at this time is considered to be the best test solution. If the configuration combination in this solution exists indivual, When , there is only one optimal solution for the measured solution. When , there are multiple optimal solutions in the measured scheme, which is called the optimal solution set; when the selected configuration combination is valid, and , When they are not minimum values ​​at the same time, the obtained solution is the feasible solution set of the measured solution.

[0029] In a preferred implementation, further, the process of generating a complete measured configuration containing all parameters in step 5 includes: traversing each entry in turn, determining whether the parameters in the corresponding measured configuration scheme have an intersection with the parameters of the entry, if there is no intersection, determining the number of corresponding entry configurations, if there is only one entry configuration, automatically combining it into the measured configuration scheme, if there is more than one entry configuration, selecting a configuration that is consistent with the actual situation to participate in the measured configuration scheme, if there is an intersection, determining the corresponding intersection configuration according to the declared value of the intersection parameter, if the number of intersection configurations is only one, integrating this configuration into the measured configuration; if there are multiple intersection configurations, integrating the selected configuration into the measured configuration according to the actual selection, and finally obtaining a complete measured configuration.

[0030] The beneficial effects of the present invention are:

[0031] First, the present invention automatically generates the optimal measurement plan by logically associating the enterprise registration information, which significantly improves the detection efficiency and accuracy. The binding relationship between the item configuration and the parameter declaration value ensures that the project configuration is reasonable, and the equivalent judgment method is combined to avoid repeated detection and reduce the detection cost. The integration and screening of the measured analysis configuration only targets key parameters, which optimizes resource utilization. The analysis and deduplication of the configuration plan improves the accuracy of the plan, and the traversal and configuration integration of the intersection parameters ensure the generation of a complete measured configuration to meet complex detection needs. Automated screening reduces manual intervention, quickly generates plans, reduces costs and time consumption, and ensures that the detection task is completed in the best way.

[0032] Second, in the preferred implementation, step 1 of the present invention automatically generates the initial configuration of each project by arranging and combining the item configurations involved in the project, and filters out the configurations that do not meet the requirements in combination with the binding relationship, thereby effectively improving the rationality and accuracy of the project configuration. After eliminating unnecessary configurations, only key parameters related to the project are retained to further optimize resource utilization. Finally, deduplication processing ensures that the generated project configuration is concise and efficient, avoids redundant configurations, improves detection efficiency, and ensures that the configuration of each project is fully analyzed and screened to meet complex detection needs.

[0033] Third, in the preferred implementation, step 4 of the present invention optimizes the selection of measured configurations and the rationality of the detection scheme. First, when the number of measured analysis configurations is 1, only one sample vehicle is needed to complete all detection tasks, and the optimal solution is quickly obtained, saving detection resources and time. When there are multiple configurations, different configuration combinations are analyzed step by step to ensure that the rationality of each combination is gradually evaluated starting from the minimum combination. This process ensures that the most reasonable and economical measured scheme is found under multiple configurations, thereby optimizing the use of sample vehicles, reducing detection costs, and ensuring that detection tasks are completed efficiently and accurately.

[0034] Fourth, in the preferred implementation, step 5 of the present invention generates a complete measured configuration to ensure that all relevant parameters are fully analyzed and integrated. By traversing the entries, determining the intersection of the measured configuration and the entry parameters, automatically screening and integrating configuration items that meet the actual situation to avoid omissions or redundancies. In the case of intersection, the most reasonable configuration is further selected in combination with the declared value to ensure that the final measured solution covers all necessary parameters. This process improves the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the measured solution, ensures the integrity of the detection, and effectively reduces repetitive work and waste of resources. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0035] Figure 1 It is a flow chart of a method for generating an optimal solution and a feasible solution of a measured solution for multiple filing declared values ​​of the present invention;

[0036] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the relationship between the filing parameters and the declared values ​​of an embodiment of the present invention;

[0037] Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of generating corresponding configurations based on filing parameters and declared values ​​according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0038] Figure 4 It is a schematic diagram of generating corresponding configuration based on certain filing information and binding relationship in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0039] Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of four items and configuration parameters of each item in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0040] Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of generating corresponding configurations of steering force and handling stability items based on binding relationships according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0041] Figure 7 It is a schematic diagram of two items of an embodiment of the present invention that are configured based on the deemed report to obtain actual measurement analysis;

[0042] Figure 8 is a schematic diagram of generating a configuration information matrix based on an entry configuration according to an embodiment of the present invention in which a measured analysis configuration is configured;

[0043] Fig. 9 is a schematic diagram of screening the measured configuration combinations of two items based on the configuration information matrix according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0044] Fig.10 It is a schematic diagram of generating a final measured analysis configuration based on multiple declared value parameters by combining the measured configurations of an embodiment of the present invention;

[0045] Fig.11 Two of the five configurations of the embodiment of the present invention are combined as follows: Schematic diagram of the analysis results of species;

[0046] Fig.12 It is a schematic diagram of the coverage configuration of any configuration in different projects in the final measured analysis configuration of the embodiment of the present invention;

[0047] Fig.13 Schematic diagram of obtaining a complete measured configuration according to an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0048] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the technical solution of the present application, the present application will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments.

[0049] In the description of this application, the terms "first", "second", and "third" are used for descriptive purposes only and are not to be understood as indicating or implying relative importance; the term "plurality" refers to two or more, unless otherwise expressly defined. Terms such as "installed", "connected", "connected", and "fixed" should be understood in a broad sense. For example, "connected" can be a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral connection; "connected" can be a direct connection or an indirect connection through an intermediate medium. For those of ordinary skill in the art, the specific meanings of the above terms in this application can be understood according to the specific circumstances.

[0050] In the description of the present application, it should be understood that the directions or positional relationships indicated by the terms "up", "down", "left", "right", "front", "back", etc. are based on the directions or positional relationships shown in the accompanying drawings, and are only for the convenience of describing the present application and simplifying the description, rather than indicating or implying that the device or unit referred to must have a specific direction, be constructed and operated in a specific orientation, and therefore, should not be understood as a limitation on the present application.

[0051] In the description of this specification, the description of the terms "one embodiment / method", "some embodiments / methods", "specific embodiments / methods", etc. means that the specific features, structures, materials or characteristics described in conjunction with the embodiment / method or example are included in at least one embodiment / method or example of the present application. In this specification, the schematic representation of the above terms does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment / method or example. Moreover, the specific features, structures, materials or characteristics described can be combined in any one or more embodiments / methods or examples in a suitable manner.

[0052] As the instruction manual Figure 1 The present invention records a method for generating an optimal solution and a feasible solution of a measured solution for multiple registered declared values, comprising:

[0053] Step 1: Based on the enterprise registration information, logically associate and classify the parameters to generate several items, and generate the corresponding item configuration according to the preset logic of each item. Based on the binding relationship between the item configuration required for the test project and the parameter declaration value provided by the enterprise, generate the corresponding project configuration for each project.

[0054] It should be noted that in automobile filing, the solution configuration refers to the set of parameters and technical specifications used for vehicle testing, certification or compliance assessment. These parameters and configurations reflect the design and technical characteristics of the vehicle and are information provided by the vehicle manufacturer to the relevant regulatory authorities during the filing process in order to prove that the vehicle complies with national or regional safety, emission, energy efficiency and other regulations and standards.

[0055] An entry consists of several registered parameters, and there must be a certain logical relationship between these registered parameters. For example, the vehicle's overall dimension length entry consists of the parameters of front overhang, wheelbase, and rear overhang, and the logical relationship between the declared values ​​of these parameters satisfies: vehicle length = front overhang + wheelbase + rear overhang. For example, the ESC entry consists of ESC model, ESC manufacturer, and ESC controller.

[0056] As the instruction manual Figure 2 , Figure 2 The first column from left to right is the registered parameters, such as the length of the overall dimension, the whole vehicle (front overhang), the distance from axle I to axle II, the distance from axle II to axle III, the distance from axle III to axle IV, and the whole vehicle (rear overhang). The second column has a parameter code corresponding to each registered parameter, and the third column corresponds to the declared value for each registered parameter. The corresponding declared value can be single or multiple.

[0057] Each entry needs to form a corresponding entry configuration based on the declared values ​​of the registered parameters in the entry. In each configuration, each parameter will only have one declared value. Figure 3 , taking the size item as an example, according to the instructions Figure 2 The size item parameters and the corresponding declared value data are combined to obtain configuration 1, configuration 2 and configuration 3.

[0058] This method has classified the filing parameters into multiple entries and preset the generation method of the corresponding configuration for each entry. When receiving the filing information of a certain vehicle model, it will check in advance whether the declared value of the corresponding parameter in each entry conforms to the corresponding data format. If it conforms, the corresponding entry configuration will be generated according to the preset logic; if it does not conform, it will prompt that the data format of the entry is incorrect and the enterprise needs to modify it before processing.

[0059] The binding relationship is to ensure the rationality of the configuration. Figure 4Taking the figure as an example, in a certain filing information, the engine model has 3 declared values, the curb weight has 3 declared values, and there are 9 vehicle configurations according to the combination. The binding relationship is set as follows: the maximum power engine WP7H270E68 can only be matched with the maximum curb weight 12000, and these two declared values ​​can only appear at the same time, or not appear at the same time. According to the binding relationship, the wrong configurations are eliminated, and finally configuration 1, configuration 2, configuration 4, configuration 5 and configuration 9 are obtained.

[0060] The method for generating project configuration of the present invention generates project configuration according to items involved in the project. The specific process of generating project configuration includes: judging which items are related to the parameters involved in the project, arranging and combining the item configurations of the items involved to form the initial configuration of each project, traversing each binding relationship in turn, judging whether the initial configuration of the project involves the corresponding binding relationship, and if so, eliminating the configuration that does not meet the requirements according to the binding relationship, and in the results after elimination, filtering and retaining the parameters related to the project, and performing deduplication processing in the filtered results to obtain the project configuration of each project.

[0061] A specific embodiment includes the following process:

[0062] As the instruction manual Figure 5 , assuming that the filing information can be divided into 4 items, Figure 5 The (a) in is the α entry, Figure 5 (b) in is the β entry, Figure 5 (c) in is the γ entry, Figure 5 (d) in the figure is a δ entry. Each entry contains corresponding parameters and the declared value corresponding to each parameter. Each entry generates a corresponding entry configuration according to the logical relationship between the declared values. The α entry includes 4 entry configurations, the β entry includes 3 entry configurations, and the γ entry and δ entry include 2 entry configurations respectively.

[0063] As the instruction manual Figure 6 Taking the steering force and handling stability detection items as an example, the steering force and handling stability detection items are related to parameter B and parameter F, and parameter B belongs to the α item, and parameter F belongs to the γ item. The item configurations of the α item and the γ item are combined to obtain the initial configuration of the steering force and handling stability detection items. The detection item includes 8 initial configurations.

[0064] Assume that there is a binding relationship: the declared value d2 of parameter D and the declared value f1 of parameter F can only appear at the same time or not at the same time. In these 8 initial configurations, it is necessary to determine whether a determination relationship is involved. The determination result is that since the binding relationship is only related to parameters D and F, the test item does not contain parameter D, so it does not involve a binding relationship and does not need to be processed. According to the determination result, only parameters B and F are retained, and then the retained results are deduplicated, and the test item obtains 4 configurations.

[0065] Step 2: Determine whether the project provides a deemed report based on the detection plan. If there is no report, all project configurations of the project need to be measured. If there is a report, select the configurations that cannot be covered by the deemed report for actual measurement, and record the configurations that need to be measured as the measured analysis configurations of the project.

[0066] It should be noted that the detection plan is provided by the enterprise, and the deemed determination method is based on the authorized invention patent CN202210906919.1 "An automatic deemed determination method for safety-compliant vehicle model detection items". This method automatically determines whether the configuration is applicable to existing test results by comparing technical parameters and configuration conditions. It will not be repeated here.

[0067] Step 3: Integrate the configurations that require actual measurement and analysis for each project. In the results of this integration, only the parameter information related to the actual measurement project is retained. On this basis, further screening is performed to retain the parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the screening results, and then the results are deduplicated to obtain the final actual measurement and analysis configuration.

[0068] It should be noted that a deemed report is a document that proves that certain configurations or systems have complied with relevant regulations or standards under specific conditions through existing test results. This means that when companies conduct vehicle filing tests, certain configurations or systems that have been tested and are compliant can directly use deemed reports without the need for repeated testing. This mechanism can reduce unnecessary testing costs and time and improve efficiency.

[0069] Step 3: Integrate the configurations that require actual measurement and analysis for each project. In the results of this integration, only the parameter information related to the actual measurement project is retained. On this basis, further screening is performed to retain the parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the screening results, and then the results are deduplicated to obtain the final actual measurement and analysis configuration.

[0070] Step 3 The specific process of obtaining the final measured analysis configuration includes: determining which items the measured items are related to, arranging and combining the item configurations of the items involved to form an initial measured analysis configuration, in the initial measured analysis configuration, screening the configurations that need to be measured for each item in turn, merging the results of all measured item screening, and on this basis, further screening to retain all parameters of the measured items and parameters with multiple declared values, and then deduplicating to obtain the final measured analysis configuration.

[0071] A specific implementation includes:

[0072] As the instruction manual Figure 5-7 , based on the specific implementation example of the detection items of steering force and handling stability in step 1, an additional detection item is added: cornering braking stability. Assuming that the cornering braking stability item is related to parameter C, parameter D and parameter E, three configurations of the cornering braking stability item are obtained similarly according to step 1. According to step 2, the steering force and handling stability item and the cornering braking stability item are deemed to be equivalent. The steering force and handling stability item provides equivalent reports with report numbers of steering force and handling stability item 1 and steering force and handling stability item 2, and the cornering braking stability item provides an equivalent report with report number 121. After the deemed determination, Figure 7 As shown in (a) of the table, configurations 1 and 4 for steering force and handling stability are considered equivalent, while configurations 2 and 3 require actual measurements. Figure 7 As shown in (b), configuration 2 of the cornering braking stability item is deemed to be equivalent, and configurations 1 and 3 need to be actually measured.

[0073] Assuming that the steering force and handling stability items and the cornering braking stability items involve α items, β items, and γ items, the configurations of these three items are arranged and combined to obtain the attached figure. Figure 8 The initial information matrix (24 configurations * 6 parameters) shown in the figure is filtered according to the binding relationship, and the configurations that do not meet the binding relationship are filtered to obtain the final information matrix (12 configurations * 6 parameters), as shown in Figure 8 Configuration 13-24 in.

[0074] As the instruction manual Figure 7 , Fig. 9 , in the final information matrix, the configurations that need to be measured for each detection item are screened in turn. Fig. 9 The steering force and handling stability items in the test were tested in 6 configurations, namely configuration 14, configuration 16, configuration 18, configuration 20, configuration 22, and configuration 24. Fig. 9 The cornering braking stability project obtained 7 measured configurations, namely configuration 13, configuration 15, configuration 16, configuration 18, configuration 19, configuration 21, and configuration 22.

[0075] As the instruction manual Fig.10 , the configurations of all measured items are combined, and only one repeated configuration is retained, and finally 10 initial measured analysis configurations are obtained. Among these 10 configurations, since the measured items are only related to parameters B, C, D, E, and F, these 5 parameters are retained. At the same time, parameters C and E have only one declared value. Parameters with only one declared value do not affect the detection plan, so they can be ignored. Parameters C and E are removed, and redundant configurations are removed to obtain 5 final measured analysis configurations.

[0076] Step 4: Analyze the number of configurations. If there is only one configuration, it is the optimal solution. All measured items are measured by this configuration. If there are multiple configurations, they need to be combined and analyzed step by step to find the most reasonable measurement solution.

[0077] Step 4 specifically includes:

[0078] Step 4.1: Analyze the number of measured analysis configurations. If there is only one configuration, it means that only one prototype is needed. The prototype can meet the testing requirements by completing all the measured items. At this time, there is an optimal solution.

[0079] Step 4.2: If there are multiple configurations, assuming the number of configurations is n, you need to analyze different configuration combinations step by step, starting from configuration number 1 to n configurations, and evaluate each combination in turn to find the most reasonable measured configuration solution.

[0080] The process of analyzing the selected configuration combinations in step 4.2 includes:

[0081] Step 4.2.1: Traverse these n configurations and analyze the actual measured situation of the i-th configuration in each project one by one, so as to obtain a set result. This set result includes how many configurations in different projects can be regarded as the measured configuration when any configuration is measured.

[0082] Step 4.2.2: From the combination Select i configurations from n optional configurations for combination analysis, select a combination, analyze each test item in turn, evaluate whether the combination meets the project requirements, and gradually screen out configurations that meet the requirements.

[0083] Step 4.2.3: For each measured item, the combination is gradually selected from i configurations. Assume that j configurations are selected each time, and the selected configurations are ①, ②… In step 4.2.1, we already know that when configuration ① is measured, there are several configurations X1 that can be regarded as configuration ①, and when configuration ② is measured, there are several configurations X2 that can be regarded as configuration ②, and so on. In actual measurement, there are several configurations Xj that can be regarded as configurations , if the union of X1, X2…Xj is these n configurations, it means that the combination of the selected j configurations is valid for this project, starting from 1, and , then there are A number of combinations need to be analyzed.

[0084] Step 4.2.4: Analyze the current test items Combination, when There are x in the combination When there are j combinations, if all of the j configurations need to be measured, and the remaining nj configurations can all be regarded as the j configurations, then the combination selected for the current test item is valid; when j=i, if all of the i configurations need to be measured, and the remaining ni configurations cannot all be regarded as the i configurations, then the i configuration combination selected in step 4.2.2 is invalid. At this time, it is necessary to analyze the situation of the next i value (i value is automatically +1), and repeat step 4.2.2 for analysis.

[0085] Step 4.2.5: Traverse all measured items in turn and analyze according to steps 4.2.3 and 4.2.4. If each measured item can be found in i configuration combinations kind The combination of configurations makes When the configuration is measured, the remaining n- If all configurations are considered equivalent, the selected configuration combination is considered valid.

[0086] Step 4.2.5: When the selected configuration combination is valid, and , When the minimum values ​​are obtained respectively, the solution at this time is considered to be the best test solution. If the configuration combination in this solution exists indivual, When , there is only one optimal solution for the measured solution. When , there are multiple optimal solutions in the measured scheme, which is called the optimal solution set; when the selected configuration combination is valid, and , When they are not minimum values ​​at the same time, the obtained solution is the feasible solution set of the measured solution.

[0087] The specific implementation is as follows:

[0088] According to step 4.2.1, analyze the configurations that any one of the five final measured analysis configurations obtained in step 3 can cover in different projects. The analysis process is basically the same as the equivalent determination method in step 2. Assume that the configurations obtained are as shown in the appendix of the manual. Fig.11 The analysis results.

[0089] Taking configuration 1 as an example, in the steering force and handling stability items, assuming that configuration 1 is actually measured, configurations 1, 2, and 3 can be regarded as configuration 1 (it can also be said that configuration 1 can cover configurations 1, 2, and 3 in the steering force and handling stability items). Similarly, in the cornering braking stability item, when configuration 1 is actually measured, configurations 1, 3, and 4 can be regarded as configuration 1.

[0090] Start selecting combinations, and first select the case where the number of configurations is 1 (i=1), that is, There are 5 situations at this time. The first situation is that configuration 1 is selected. At this time, it is found that when configuration 1 is actually measured, the steering force and handling stability items can only be covered by configurations 1, 2, and 3. The remaining configurations 4 and 5 cannot be covered, so the situation of selecting configuration 1 alone is not acceptable; configurations 2, 3, 4, and 5 are analyzed in turn and none of them work.

[0091] At this time, the case where the number of configurations is 2 (i=2), that is, There are three combinations, namely configuration 1 and 2, configuration 1 and 3, configuration 1 and 4, configuration 1 and 5, configuration 2 and 3, configuration 2 and 4, configuration 2 and 5, configuration 3 and 4, configuration 3 and 5, and configuration 4 and 5.

[0092] First, we analyze the combination of configuration 1 and configuration 2. At this time, i=2. We first analyze the steering force and handling stability items. Although there are two configurations at this time, not both configurations are actually measured. We need to further select one (j=1) configuration from the two configurations, that is, There are 2 choices. At this time, the steering force and handling stability items of single-choice configuration 1 are measured and found not to meet the requirements. Then it is found that the steering force and handling stability items of single-choice configuration 2 still do not meet the requirements. At this time, it is necessary to take 2. When configuration 1 and configuration 2 are measured in steering force and handling stability items, the union of the configurations they can cover is 1, 2, 3, and 4, not the full set of 5 configurations, which means that the combination of configuration 1 and configuration 2 is not acceptable, and the next group of situations needs to be analyzed.

[0093] As the instruction manual Fig.12 , are the analysis results of 10 combinations, from Fig.12 It can be seen that only the fifth case meets the requirements. At this time, two prototypes are needed to complete the entire test task, and the two prototypes belong to configuration 2 and configuration 3. In addition, the steering force and handling stability items and the cornering braking stability items all require these two configurations for actual testing. At this time, there is only one solution, and there is an optimal solution.

[0094] Similarly, we analyze the combinations when i=3, 4, and 5. There will definitely be a corresponding combination that meets the requirements, but the value of i is not the smallest at this time, and the obtained solution is a feasible solution.

[0095] Step 5: Traverse all entries and determine whether there are intersection parameters between the measured configuration and the entry. If there are intersection parameters, it is necessary to find the corresponding intersection configuration, select which intersection configuration the actual sample vehicle belongs to, and integrate the selected intersection configuration into the actual configuration obtained in step 4; if there are no intersection parameters, select which entry configuration the actual sample vehicle belongs to according to the configuration of the corresponding entry, and integrate the selected entry configuration into the actual configuration obtained in step 4 until a complete measured configuration containing all parameters is generated.

[0096] The process of generating a complete measured configuration containing all parameters includes: traversing each entry in turn, determining whether the parameters in the corresponding measured configuration scheme have an intersection with the parameters of the entry, if there is no intersection, determining the number of corresponding entry configurations, if there is only one entry configuration, it is automatically combined into the measured configuration scheme, if there is more than one entry configuration, selecting the configuration that matches the actual situation to participate in the measured configuration scheme, if there is an intersection, determining the corresponding intersection configuration according to the declared value of the intersection parameter, if the number of intersection configurations is only one, integrating this configuration into the measured configuration; if there are multiple intersection configurations, integrating the selected configuration into the measured configuration according to the actual selection, and finally obtaining a complete measured configuration.

[0097] A specific embodiment includes:

[0098] As the instruction manual Fig.13 As shown in (a) in the figure, it is known that the optimal solution is the combination of configuration 2 and configuration 3. At this time, the corresponding optimal solution only contains parameters B, D, F and the relevant declared values ​​of these parameters, and other parameters and their declared values ​​are missing. In this case, they need to be completed. Take completing configuration 2 as an example, as shown in the attached manual. Fig.13 As shown in (b) in the figure, it is determined whether configuration 2 has intersection parameters with all entries. For entry α, it is found that there is an intersection parameter B. At this time, according to the declared value b1 of parameter B, it is found that there are intersection configurations α1 and α3 in entry α. It is necessary to select which configuration the sample vehicle should be based on the actual situation (that is, the declared value of parameter A should be a1 or a2), and add parameter A to configuration 2 based on the selection result.

[0099] Similarly, for item β, the declared value of parameter C should be c1; for item γ, the declared value of parameter E should be e1; for item δ, it is found that there is no intersection parameter, and item δ has 2 configurations. At this time, it is necessary to choose whether the actual sample vehicle is configured with δ1 or δ2 according to the actual situation, and integrate the declared values ​​of the corresponding parameters into the measured configuration 2, so that the complete measured configuration 2 can be obtained.

[0100] The present invention automatically generates the optimal and feasible measurement scheme, and uses the equivalent judgment method to avoid repeated detection and reduce the detection cost. Through the screening of logical relationships and binding relationships, the rationality and accuracy of the detection scheme are ensured. It can flexibly adapt to different configuration combinations, optimize detection resources, and improve detection efficiency. In addition, the present invention can automatically fill in the missing parameters and declared values, ensure the integrity of the measured configuration, and is suitable for complex filing and multi-configuration detection needs.

[0101] The above is only an embodiment of the present invention, and the common sense such as the known specific structure and characteristics in the scheme is not described in detail here. For those skilled in the art, it is obvious that the present invention is not limited to the details of the above exemplary embodiments, and the present invention can be implemented in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or basic characteristics of the present invention. Therefore, no matter from which point of view, the embodiments should be regarded as exemplary and non-restrictive, and the scope of the present invention is defined by the attached claims rather than the above description, so it is intended to include all changes within the meaning and scope of the equivalent elements of the claims. Any figure mark in the claims should not be regarded as limiting the claims involved.

Claims

1. A method for generating optimal solutions and feasible solutions for measured solutions for multiple registered declared values, characterized in that: Methods include: Step 1: Based on the enterprise filing information, logically associate and classify the parameters to generate several items, and generate the corresponding item configuration according to the preset logic of each item. Based on the binding relationship between the item configuration required for the test item and the parameter declaration value provided by the enterprise, generate the corresponding project configuration for each item; Step 2: Determine whether the project provides a deemed report based on the test plan. If there is no report, all project configurations of the project need to be tested. If there is a report, select the configurations that cannot be covered by the deemed report for testing, and record the configurations that need to be tested as the measured analysis configurations of the project. Step 3: Integrate the configurations that need to be measured and analyzed for each project. In the results of this integration, only the parameter information related to the measured project is retained. On this basis, further screening is performed to retain the parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the screening results, and then the results are deduplicated to obtain the final measured analysis configuration; Step 4: Analyze the number of configurations. If there is only one configuration, it is the optimal solution. All measured items are measured by this configuration. If there are multiple configurations, they need to be combined and analyzed step by step to find the most reasonable measurement solution. Step 5: Traverse all entries and determine whether there are intersection parameters between the measured configuration and the entry. If there are intersection parameters, it is necessary to find the corresponding intersection configuration, select which intersection configuration the actual sample vehicle belongs to, and integrate the selected intersection configuration into the actual configuration obtained in step 4; if there are no intersection parameters, select which entry configuration the actual sample vehicle belongs to according to the configuration of the corresponding entry, and integrate the selected entry configuration into the actual configuration obtained in step 4 until a complete measured configuration containing all parameters is generated.

2. The method for generating the optimal solution and feasible solution of the measured scheme for multiple registered declared values ​​according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step 1 includes: Generate project configuration according to the items involved in the project. According to the parameters involved in the project, determine which items these parameters are related to. Arrange and combine the item configurations of the items involved to form the initial configuration of each project. Traverse each binding relationship in turn to determine whether the initial configuration of the project involves the corresponding binding relationship. If so, eliminate the configurations that do not meet the requirements according to the binding relationship. In the results after elimination, filter and retain the parameters related to the project. In the filtered results, perform deduplication processing to obtain the project configuration of each project.

3. The method for generating the optimal solution and feasible solution of the measured scheme for multiple registered declared values ​​according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step 3 The process of obtaining the final measured analysis configuration includes: determining which items the measured project is related to, arranging and combining the item configurations of these items to form an initial measured analysis configuration, screening the configurations that need to be measured in each measured project based on the initial measured analysis configuration, merging the results after screening each project, and then retaining all parameters related to the measured project in the obtained merged results, and on this basis, further screening, retaining parameters with multiple declared values ​​in the results, and then deduplicating to obtain the final measured analysis configuration.

4. The method for generating the optimal solution and feasible solution of the measured scheme for multiple registered declared values ​​according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step 4 includes: Step 4.1: Analyze the number of measured analysis configurations. If there is only one configuration, it means that only one prototype is needed. The prototype can meet the testing requirements by completing all the measured items. At this time, there is an optimal solution. Step 4.2: If there are multiple configurations, assuming the number of configurations is n, you need to analyze different configuration combinations step by step, starting from configuration number 1 to n configurations, and evaluate each combination in turn to find the most reasonable measured configuration solution.

5. The method for generating the optimal solution and feasible solution of the measured scheme for multiple registered declared values ​​according to claim 4, characterized in that: The process of analyzing the selected configuration combinations in step 4.2 includes: Step 4.2.1 Traverse these n configurations and analyze the actual measured situation of the i-th configuration in each project one by one, so as to obtain a set result. This set result includes how many configurations in different projects can be regarded as the measured configuration when any configuration is measured; Step 4.2.2: From the combination Select i configurations from the n optional configurations for combination analysis, select a combination, analyze each test item in turn, evaluate whether the combination meets the project requirements, and gradually select configurations that meet the requirements; Step 4.2.3: For each measured item, the combination is gradually selected from i configurations. Assume that j configurations are selected each time, and the selected configurations are ①, ②… In step 4.2.1, we already know that when configuration ① is measured, there are several configuration sets X1 that can be regarded as configuration ①, and when configuration ② is measured, there are several configuration sets X2 that can be regarded as configuration ②, and so on. In actual measurement, there are several configuration sets Xj that can be regarded as configurations , if the union of X1, X2…Xj is these n configurations, it means that the combination of the selected j configurations is valid for this project, starting from 1, and , then there are There are many combinations that need to be analyzed; Step 4.2.4: Analyze the current test items Combination, when When there are x combinations in the combination situation, if all of the j configurations need to be measured, and the remaining nj configurations can all be regarded as the j configurations, then the combination selected for the current test item is valid; when j=i, if all of the i configurations need to be measured, and the remaining ni configurations cannot all be regarded as the i configurations, then the i configuration combination selected in step 5.3.1 is invalid. At this time, it is necessary to analyze the situation of the next i value, and repeat step 4.2.2 for analysis; Step 4.2.5: Traverse all measured items in turn and analyze according to steps 4.2.3 and 4.2.

4. If each measured item can be found in i configuration combinations kind The combination of configurations makes When the configuration is measured, the remaining n- If all configurations can be regarded as equivalent, the selected configuration combination is determined to be valid; Step 4.2.6: When the selected configuration combination is valid, and , When the minimum values ​​are obtained respectively, the solution at this time is considered to be the best test solution. If the configuration combination in this solution exists indivual, When , there is only one optimal solution for the measured solution. When , there are multiple optimal solutions in the measured scheme, which is called the optimal solution set; when the selected configuration combination is valid, and , When they are not minimum values ​​at the same time, the obtained solution is the feasible solution set of the measured solution.

6. The method for generating the optimal solution and feasible solution of the measured scheme for multiple registered declared values ​​according to claim 1, characterized in that: The process of generating a complete measured configuration containing all parameters in step 5 includes: traversing each entry in turn, determining whether the parameters in the corresponding measured configuration scheme have an intersection with the parameters of the entry, if there is no intersection, determining the number of corresponding entry configurations, if there is only one entry configuration, it is automatically combined into the measured configuration scheme, if there is more than one entry configuration, then selecting the configuration that matches the actual situation to participate in the measured configuration scheme, if there is an intersection, then determining the corresponding intersection configuration according to the declared value of the intersection parameter, if the number of intersection configurations is only one, then integrating this configuration into the measured configuration; if there are multiple intersection configurations, then integrating the selected configuration into the measured configuration according to the actual selection, and finally obtaining a complete measured configuration.

Images