System contribution rate evaluation method and device

Abstract

The application provides a system contribution rate evaluation method, including: performing demand analysis on a mission task to obtain at least one task unit and capability demand of the task unit, wherein the capability demand includes: a capability demand type and a demand index interval corresponding to the capability demand type under a plurality of task execution degrees; obtaining at least one corresponding weapon equipment and an inherent combat capability corresponding to the capability demand type and the weapon equipment from a weapon equipment system according to the capability demand of each task unit; obtaining a first capability demand satisfaction degree interval of a target weapon equipment corresponding to each task unit according to a preset satisfaction degree function, a target inherent combat capability of the target weapon equipment and a demand index interval of the task unit; and obtaining a first system contribution rate evaluation value interval of the target weapon equipment corresponding to the plurality of task execution degrees according to a preset improved grey entropy model, the first capability demand satisfaction degree interval and a multi-criteria compromise solution sorting method.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of equipment systems, and in particular to a method and apparatus for evaluating system contribution rate. Background Technology

[0002] The development and use of weaponry are crucial to national defense and security, and are closely related to national interests and the rise and fall of a nation. Weaponry system evaluation refers to the effectiveness of weaponry in achieving expected objectives under specific conditions when used to perform a particular combat mission. Currently, weapon system evaluation methods are increasingly diverse. The traditional method incorporates enemy targets into the operational loop model: a reconnaissance node discovers an enemy target, transmits the information to its own decision-making node, processes and analyzes the data, sends commands to the attack node, and the attack node executes the commands to strike the enemy target—a cyclical process. However, this method has two problems: it does not consider the simultaneous engagement with multiple missions; weapon system evaluation aims to optimize weaponry during the operational development and usage phase, not just a single mission. Furthermore, it does not consider the quantity and scale of weaponry deployment during the operational phase, ignoring the differences in mission performance metrics caused by the operational environment and strategies. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The technical objective of this application is to provide a system contribution rate evaluation method and apparatus to address the problem that current system contribution rate evaluation methods cannot meet the evaluation needs in situations involving multiple tasks and multiple execution levels.

[0004] To address the aforementioned technical problems, embodiments of this application provide a method for evaluating system contribution rate, including:

[0005] A requirements analysis is conducted on the mission tasks to obtain at least one task unit and the capability requirements of the task unit. The capability requirements include: the capability requirement type and the corresponding requirement index range for the capability requirement type under multiple task execution levels.

[0006] Based on the capability requirements of each mission unit, at least one corresponding weapon or equipment and the inherent combat capabilities corresponding to the capability requirement type of the weapon or equipment are obtained from the weapon or equipment system.

[0007] Based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capabilities of the target weapon and equipment and the demand index range of the task unit, the first capability demand satisfaction range of the target weapon and equipment for each task unit is obtained.

[0008] Based on the pre-defined improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, and the multi-criteria compromise solution ranking method (VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje, abbreviated as VIKOR), the first system contribution rate evaluation value interval of the target weapon system corresponding to the degree of execution of multiple tasks is obtained.

[0009] Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on a preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capabilities of the target weapon system, and the requirement index range of the mission unit, includes the following steps for obtaining the first capability requirement satisfaction range for each mission unit corresponding to the target weapon system:

[0010] Based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capabilities of the target, and the range of demand indicators, obtain the second capability demand satisfaction range for each target capability demand type in each mission unit corresponding to the target weapon system.

[0011] The first capability requirement satisfaction interval is obtained by considering the second capability requirement satisfaction interval corresponding to all target capability requirement types in the task unit.

[0012] Preferably, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, in the step of obtaining the first system contribution rate assessment value range for the target weapon system corresponding to multiple mission execution levels based on the preset improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, and VIKOR, includes:

[0013] Based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, a correction coefficient is obtained;

[0014] Based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range, obtain the second system contribution rate assessment value range of the target weapon system to the weapon system under multiple mission execution levels.

[0015] The contribution rate assessment range of the second system is corrected according to the correction coefficient to obtain the contribution rate assessment range of the first system.

[0016] Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on the improved gray entropy model and the satisfaction level of the first capability requirement, includes the following steps to obtain a correction coefficient:

[0017] Obtain reference values ​​for the demand index ranges of all task units and construct a reference sequence. The reference values ​​are the maximum values ​​in the first capability demand satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment corresponding to the task units in the weapon and equipment system.

[0018] Based on the range of the target weapon system's satisfaction with the primary capability requirements of all mission units, a comparative sequence is constructed.

[0019] Based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence, the correction coefficients are obtained.

[0020] Furthermore, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, based on the improved gray entropy model, reference series, and comparison series, includes the following steps for obtaining the correction coefficient:

[0021] Based on the first preset algorithm, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence, the grey relational coefficient between the comparison sequence and the reference values ​​in the reference sequence is obtained;

[0022] Based on the second preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient, the grey relational degree between the comparison sequence and the reference sequence is obtained;

[0023] Based on the third preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient, the balance of the sequence formed by the comparison sequence and the reference sequence is obtained;

[0024] Based on the fourth preset algorithm, grey relational degree, and balance degree, the correction coefficient is obtained.

[0025] Preferably, the method for evaluating the system contribution rate as described above, in the step of obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels, based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range, includes:

[0026] The first capability requirement satisfaction range for obtaining all weapons and equipment of the same type as the target weapons and equipment from the weapon and equipment system;

[0027] Based on the degree of task execution, the maximum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is determined to be the positive ideal solution, and the minimum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is determined to be the negative ideal solution.

[0028] The second system contribution rate evaluation value range is obtained based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm.

[0029] Specifically, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above includes the following steps for obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm:

[0030] Based on the first sub-algorithm, task execution degree, first capability requirement satisfaction interval, positive ideal solution, and negative ideal solution in the fifth preset algorithm, obtain the group benefit value interval corresponding to the target weapon and equipment;

[0031] Based on the second sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the degree of task execution, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution, obtain the individual regret value interval corresponding to the target weapon and equipment;

[0032] Based on the third sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the group benefit value, and the individual regret value, the range of the contribution rate evaluation value of the second system is obtained.

[0033] Furthermore, in the system contribution rate assessment method described above, before the step of obtaining the second system contribution rate assessment value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm, the method further includes:

[0034] Obtain the weight coefficients of the target task unit;

[0035] Based on the degree of task execution, the range of first capability requirement satisfaction, positive ideal solution, negative ideal solution, fifth preset algorithm, and weight coefficients, the range of contribution rate evaluation values ​​for the second system is obtained.

[0036] Preferably, in the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, the step of obtaining the weight coefficients of the target task unit includes:

[0037] Based on the subjective weighting values ​​obtained from the decision-making experts, the subjective weights of the target task units are obtained.

[0038] The objective weights of the target task units are obtained using the interval center point distance method.

[0039] The weight coefficients are obtained based on subjective weights, objective weights, and the sixth preset algorithm.

[0040] Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, in which the subjective weights of the target task units are obtained based on the subjective weighting values ​​acquired from decision-making experts, includes the following steps:

[0041] The consistency of the subjective weighting values ​​is checked according to the seventh preset algorithm, and the check results are obtained.

[0042] When the test results show consistency, the subjective weight is determined based on the subjective weighting value.

[0043] When the test results show inconsistency, the subjective weighting value is re-acquired.

[0044] Furthermore, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on the interval center point distance method, includes the following steps for obtaining the objective weights of the capability requirement indicators for the target task unit:

[0045] According to the eighth preset algorithm, obtain the center point of the demand index range;

[0046] According to the ninth preset algorithm, the average value of the difference between each demand indicator and the center point in the demand indicator interval is obtained;

[0047] The objective weights are obtained through normalization.

[0048] Preferably, in the system contribution rate assessment method described above, after correcting the second system contribution rate assessment value range according to the correction coefficient to obtain the first system contribution rate assessment value range, the method further includes:

[0049] Based on the first system contribution rate range of each weapon system, obtain multiple lists of the same type of weapon system sorted under multiple mission execution levels.

[0050] Based on preset testing conditions and multiple lists, the preferred weapons and equipment are determined.

[0051] Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on preset verification conditions and multiple lists, includes the following steps for determining the preferred weapon equipment:

[0052] The verification parameters for each weapon and equipment are obtained according to the tenth preset algorithm;

[0053] Based on the order of weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters, the preferred weapons and equipment are determined.

[0054] Furthermore, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, based on the order of weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters, includes the following steps for determining the preferred weapons and equipment:

[0055] According to the order of arrangement, obtain the difference between the second verification parameter corresponding to the next weapon and the first verification parameter corresponding to the previous weapon in two adjacent weapons.

[0056] When the difference is less than the preset value, both weapons and equipment corresponding to the difference are determined to be preferred weapons and equipment.

[0057] When the difference is greater than or equal to the preset value, obtain the group benefit sequence and individual regret sequence of the next weapon and equipment and the previous weapon and equipment sorted according to the group benefit value and individual regret value;

[0058] When the order of the next weapon and the previous weapon in the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence is the same as the order in the preset list, the previous weapon is determined to be the preferred weapon.

[0059] When the order of the preceding and following weapons in the collective benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence differs from their order in the preset list, both the preceding and following weapons are determined to be preferred weapons.

[0060] Another preferred embodiment of this application also provides a control device, including:

[0061] The first processing module is used to perform requirements analysis on the mission tasks to obtain at least one task unit and the capability requirements of the task unit. The capability requirements include: capability requirement types and the requirement index ranges corresponding to the capability requirement types under multiple task execution levels.

[0062] The second processing module is used to obtain at least one corresponding weapon and equipment and the inherent combat capabilities corresponding to the type of capability requirement from the weapon and equipment system according to the capability requirements of each task unit.

[0063] The third processing module is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction interval of the target weapon equipment for each task unit based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capability of the target weapon equipment, and the requirement index interval of the task unit.

[0064] The fourth processing module is used to obtain the first system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system corresponding to the degree of execution of multiple tasks, based on the preset improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction range and VIKOR.

[0065] Specifically, in the control device described above, the third processing module includes:

[0066] The first processing submodule is used to obtain the second capability requirement satisfaction interval of the target weapon equipment for each target capability requirement type in each task unit, based on the preset satisfaction function, the target's inherent combat capability and the requirement index interval.

[0067] The second processing submodule is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction interval based on the second capability requirement satisfaction interval corresponding to all target capability requirement types in the task unit.

[0068] Preferably, in the control device described above, the fourth processing module includes:

[0069] The third processing submodule is used to obtain a correction coefficient based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction range.

[0070] The fourth processing submodule is used to obtain the range of evaluation values ​​of the second system contribution rate of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels, based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range.

[0071] The fifth processing submodule is used to correct the contribution rate evaluation value range of the second system according to the correction coefficient, so as to obtain the contribution rate evaluation value range of the first system.

[0072] Specifically, in the control device described above, the third processing submodule includes:

[0073] The first processing unit is used to obtain reference values ​​of the demand index range of all task units and form a reference sequence. The reference values ​​are the maximum values ​​of the first capability demand satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment corresponding to the task units in the weapon and equipment system.

[0074] The second processing unit is used to construct a comparison sequence based on the target weapon system's satisfaction range of the first capability requirements of all mission units.

[0075] The third processing unit is used to obtain the correction coefficients based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence.

[0076] Furthermore, in the control device described above, the third processing unit includes:

[0077] The first processing subunit is used to obtain the grey relational coefficient between the reference value in the comparison sequence and the reference sequence according to the first preset algorithm, the reference sequence and the comparison sequence;

[0078] The second processing subunit is used to obtain the grey relational degree between the comparison sequence and the reference sequence according to the second preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient.

[0079] The third processing subunit is used to obtain the balance of the sequence formed by the comparison sequence and the reference sequence according to the third preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient.

[0080] The fourth processing subunit is used to obtain the correction coefficient based on the fourth preset algorithm, gray relational degree, and balance degree.

[0081] Preferably, in the control device described above, the fourth sub-processing module includes:

[0082] The fourth processing unit is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment of the same type as the target weapons and equipment from the weapon and equipment system.

[0083] The fifth processing unit is used to determine, based on the degree of task execution, the maximum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is a positive ideal solution, and the minimum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is a negative ideal solution;

[0084] The sixth processing unit is used to obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm.

[0085] Specifically, in the control device described above, the sixth processing unit includes:

[0086] The fifth processing subunit is used to obtain the group benefit value range corresponding to the target weapon and equipment based on the first sub-algorithm, the degree of task execution, the range of first capability requirement satisfaction, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution in the fifth preset algorithm.

[0087] The sixth processing subunit is used to obtain the individual regret value range corresponding to the target weapon and equipment based on the second sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the task execution degree, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution;

[0088] The seventh processing subunit is used to obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the third sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the group benefit value, and the individual regret value.

[0089] Furthermore, the control device described above also includes:

[0090] The fifth processing module is used to obtain the weight coefficients of the target task unit;

[0091] The sixth processing module is used to obtain the range of contribution rate evaluation values ​​for the second system based on the degree of task execution, the range of first capability requirement satisfaction, positive ideal solution, negative ideal solution, fifth preset algorithm, and weight coefficients.

[0092] Preferably, in the control device described above, the fifth processing module includes:

[0093] The sixth processing submodule is used to obtain the subjective weight of the target task unit based on the subjective weighting values ​​obtained from the decision experts.

[0094] The seventh processing submodule is used to obtain the objective weight of the target task unit based on the distance method of the interval center point;

[0095] The eighth processing submodule is used to obtain the weight coefficients based on subjective weights, objective weights, and the sixth preset algorithm.

[0096] Specifically, in the control device described above, the sixth processing submodule includes:

[0097] The seventh processing unit is used to perform a consistency check on the subjective weighted values ​​according to the seventh preset algorithm and obtain the check result;

[0098] The eighth processing unit is used to determine the subjective weight based on the subjective weighting value when the test results are consistent.

[0099] The ninth processing unit is used to reacquire the subjective weighting value when the test result is inconsistent.

[0100] Furthermore, in the control device described above, the seventh processing submodule includes:

[0101] The tenth processing unit is used to obtain the center point of the demand index range according to the eighth preset algorithm;

[0102] The eleventh processing unit is used to obtain the average value of the difference between each demand indicator and the center point in the demand indicator range according to the ninth preset algorithm.

[0103] The twelfth processing unit is used to obtain objective weights through normalization.

[0104] Preferably, the control device described above further includes:

[0105] The seventh processing module is used to obtain multiple lists of weapons and equipment of the same type, sorted according to the first system contribution rate range of each weapon and equipment under multiple mission execution levels.

[0106] The eighth processing module is used to determine the preferred weapon equipment based on preset inspection conditions and multiple lists.

[0107] Specifically, in the control device described above, the eighth processing module includes:

[0108] The ninth processing submodule is used to obtain the verification parameters corresponding to each weapon and equipment according to the tenth preset algorithm;

[0109] The tenth processing submodule is used to determine the preferred weapons and equipment based on the arrangement order of weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters.

[0110] Furthermore, in the control device described above, the tenth processing submodule includes:

[0111] The thirteenth processing unit is used to sequentially obtain the difference between the second verification parameter corresponding to the latter weapon and the first verification parameter corresponding to the former weapon in two adjacent weapon systems according to the arrangement order.

[0112] The fourteenth processing unit is used to determine that when the difference is less than a preset value, both weapons and equipment corresponding to the difference are preferred weapons and equipment.

[0113] The fifteenth processing unit is used to obtain the group benefit sequence and individual regret sequence of the next weapon and equipment after sorting the group benefit value and individual regret value according to the group benefit value and individual regret value when the difference is greater than or equal to the preset value.

[0114] The sixteenth processing unit is used to determine the former weapon as the preferred weapon when the order of the latter weapon and the former weapon in the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence is the same as the order in the preset list.

[0115] The seventeenth processing unit is used to determine that both the preceding and following weapon systems are preferred weapon systems when the order of the following weapon system and the preceding weapon system in the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence is different from the order in the preset list.

[0116] Another preferred embodiment of this application provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the system contribution rate evaluation method as described above.

[0117] Compared with the prior art, the system contribution evaluation method and apparatus provided in this application have at least the following beneficial effects:

[0118] The embodiments of this application introduce interval numbers, especially triangular fuzzy interval numbers, to obtain the degree to which weapon equipment meets the capability requirements of task units under different task execution levels. From the perspective of task execution level, the system contribution rate of weapon equipment is evaluated, and the system contribution rate evaluation value is obtained through gray entropy model and VIKOR, which improves the reliability of the evaluation results. Attached Figure Description

[0119] Figure 1 One of the flowcharts illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0120] Figure 2 The second flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0121] Figure 3 The third flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0122] Figure 4 The fourth flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0123] Figure 5 Fifth flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0124] Figure 6 Sixth flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0125] Figure 7 The seventh flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0126] Figure 8 The eighth flowchart illustrating the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0127] Figure 9 Flowchart nine of the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0128] Figure 10 Flowchart 10 of the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0129] Figure 11 Flowchart 11 of the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0130] Figure 12 Flowchart XII of the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0131] Figure 13 Flowchart XIII of the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0132] Figure 14 Flowchart fourteen of the system contribution assessment method for this application;

[0133] Figure 15 This is a schematic diagram of the control device of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0134] To make the technical problems, technical solutions, and advantages of this application clearer, a detailed description will be provided below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. In the following description, specific details such as particular configurations and components are provided merely to aid in a comprehensive understanding of the embodiments of this application. Therefore, those skilled in the art should understand that various changes and modifications can be made to the embodiments described herein without departing from the scope and spirit of this application. Furthermore, for clarity and brevity, descriptions of known functions and structures have been omitted.

[0135] It should be understood that the phrase "one embodiment" or "an embodiment" throughout the specification means that a specific feature, structure, or characteristic related to the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of this application. Therefore, "in one embodiment" or "in an embodiment" appearing throughout the specification does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment. Furthermore, these specific features, structures, or characteristics can be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments.

[0136] In the various embodiments of this application, it should be understood that the sequence number of each process described below does not imply the order of execution. The execution order of each process should be determined by its function and internal logic, and should not constitute any limitation on the implementation process of the embodiments of this application.

[0137] It should be understood that the term "and / or" in this article is merely a description of the relationship between related objects, indicating that three relationships can exist. For example, A and / or B can represent: A existing alone, A and B existing simultaneously, or B existing alone. Additionally, the character " / " in this article generally indicates that the preceding and following related objects have an "or" relationship.

[0138] In the embodiments provided in this application, it should be understood that "B corresponding to A" means that B is associated with A, and B can be determined based on A. However, it should also be understood that determining B based on A does not mean determining B solely based on A; B can also be determined based on A and / or other information.

[0139] See Figure 1 One embodiment of this application provides a method for evaluating the contribution rate of a system, including:

[0140] Step S101: Perform a requirements analysis on the mission task to obtain at least one task unit and the capability requirements of the task unit. The capability requirements include: the capability requirement type and the requirement index range corresponding to the capability requirement type under multiple task execution levels.

[0141] In other words, after receiving the assigned mission, a requirements analysis is performed to obtain at least one task unit and its capability requirements. These capability requirements include, but are not limited to, capability requirement types and requirement index ranges corresponding to these types at various task execution levels. Preferably, these requirement index ranges are represented by triangular fuzzy interval numbers, and all subsequent descriptions and calculations of intervals are based on distances between these intervals. Optionally, the requirements analysis steps include, but are not limited to, automatic requirements analysis based on keywords, or forwarding the mission to relevant experts and integrating the received expert analysis results.

[0142] Step S102: Based on the capability requirements of each mission unit, obtain at least one corresponding weapon or equipment and the inherent combat capability corresponding to the capability requirement type from the weapon or equipment system.

[0143] In other words, after obtaining the capability requirements of each task unit, at least one weapon or piece of equipment corresponding to the capability requirements of the task unit and the inherent combat capability of the weapon or piece of equipment corresponding to the capability requirement type will be obtained from the weapon system according to the capability requirements. This establishes a correspondence between task units and / or capability requirements and weapon or piece of equipment. Preferably, the obtained weapon or piece of equipment corresponds to at least one capability requirement type in the task unit. For example, the capability requirement types of a certain task unit include: a first capability, a second capability, a third capability, and a fourth capability. The obtained first weapon or piece of equipment may have only one or more of these capabilities. Alternatively, a weapon or piece of equipment type corresponding to a combination of at least one capability requirement type can be pre-selected. Then, when obtaining weapon or piece of equipment, the corresponding weapon or piece of equipment can be obtained from the weapon system according to the combination of capability requirement types in the task unit. Step S103: According to the preset satisfaction function, the target inherent combat capability of the target weapon or piece of equipment, and the requirement index range of the task unit, the first capability requirement satisfaction range of the target weapon or piece of equipment corresponding to each task unit is obtained.

[0144] In other words, one of the acquired weapons and equipment will be selected sequentially or separately as the target weapon and equipment. Based on the inherent combat capabilities of the target weapon and equipment and the requirement index range of the mission unit, the first capability requirement satisfaction range of the target weapon and equipment for each mission unit can be obtained, that is, the requirement satisfaction of the target weapon and equipment for each mission unit under different mission execution levels.

[0145] Step S104: Based on the preset improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, and the multi-criteria compromise solution ranking method VIKOR, obtain the first system contribution rate evaluation value interval of the target weapon equipment corresponding to the degree of execution of multiple tasks.

[0146] In other words, after obtaining the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the interval will be processed according to the preset improved gray entropy model and VIKOR to obtain the first system contribution rate evaluation value interval of the target weapon equipment corresponding to the degree of execution of multiple tasks. The improved gray entropy model is preferably obtained by introducing information entropy theory into the traditional gray entropy model.

[0147] In summary, the embodiments of this application introduce interval numbers, especially triangular fuzzy interval numbers, to obtain the degree to which weapon equipment meets the capability requirements of the task unit under different task execution levels. From the perspective of task execution level, the system contribution rate of weapon equipment is evaluated, and the system contribution rate evaluation value is obtained through gray entropy model and VIKOR, thereby improving the reliability of the evaluation results.

[0148] See Figure 2Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on a preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capabilities of the target weapon system, and the requirement index range of the mission unit, includes the following steps for obtaining the first capability requirement satisfaction range for each mission unit corresponding to the target weapon system:

[0149] Step S201: Based on the preset satisfaction function, the target's inherent combat capabilities, and the demand index range, obtain the second capability demand satisfaction range for each target capability demand type in each mission unit corresponding to the target weapon equipment.

[0150] In other words, when obtaining the first capability requirement satisfaction interval for each mission unit corresponding to the target weapon system, the inherent combat capabilities of the target weapon system and the requirement index interval corresponding to the mission unit are substituted into the preset satisfaction function according to the capability requirement type of the mission unit. This yields the second capability requirement satisfaction interval for each target capability requirement type in each mission unit. Optionally, the preset satisfaction function in this application is:

[0151]

[0152] x represents the inherent combat capability of the weapon system;

[0153] y represents the capability requirement indicator;

[0154] The final range for satisfying the second capability requirement is:

[0155]

[0156] Where, N i Type of target capability requirement;

[0157] C1 refers to the target weapon or equipment;

[0158] R m As a task unit;

[0159] R represents the range of requirement indicators for the target capability requirement type corresponding to the task unit; where R m →L corresponds to the capability requirement index for the first task execution level, such as when issuing an early warning to the enemy. R m →M corresponds to the second task execution level, such as the capability requirement index for expelling the enemy, R m →U represents the capability requirement index for the third task execution level, such as the annihilation of the enemy.

[0160] Step S202: Obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction interval based on the second capability requirement satisfaction interval corresponding to all target capability requirement types in the task unit.

[0161] Preferably, the sum of the second capability requirement satisfaction intervals corresponding to all target capability requirement types of the target weapon equipment in the mission unit is taken as the first capability requirement satisfaction interval.

[0162] See Figure 3 Preferably, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on a preset improved gray entropy model, a first capability requirement satisfaction interval, and the VIKOR multi-criteria compromise solution ranking method, includes the following steps for obtaining the first system contribution rate assessment value interval for the target weapon system corresponding to multiple mission execution levels:

[0163] Step S301: Based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, a correction coefficient is obtained;

[0164] Step S302: Based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range, obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels.

[0165] Step S303: Correct the contribution rate evaluation range of the second system according to the correction coefficient to obtain the contribution rate evaluation range of the first system.

[0166] In other words, when obtaining the first system contribution rate assessment value range corresponding to multiple mission execution levels of the target weapon system, the first capability requirement satisfaction range is respectively input into the improved gray entropy model and VIKOR to obtain the correction coefficient and the initial assessment of the second system contribution rate assessment value range. Then, the second system contribution rate assessment value range is corrected according to the correction coefficient to obtain the first system contribution rate assessment value range, which helps to ensure the accuracy of the obtained first system contribution rate assessment value range. In this embodiment, the preferred algorithm for correction is:

[0167]

[0168] Among them, G i (λ) represents the range of the first system contribution rate assessment value for weapon equipment i;

[0169] T i This is a correction factor;

[0170] Q i (λ) represents the range of the second system contribution rate assessment value for weapon equipment i.

[0171] See Figure 4 Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on the improved gray entropy model and the satisfaction level of the first capability requirement, includes the following steps to obtain a correction coefficient:

[0172] Step S401: Obtain the reference values ​​of the demand index ranges of all task units and form a reference sequence. The reference values ​​are the maximum values ​​in the first capability demand satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment corresponding to the task units in the weapon and equipment system. The reference sequence F0 = {f0(1), f0(2), ..., f0(m)}, where m is the number of task units.

[0173] Step S402: Based on the target weapon system's satisfaction range of the first capability requirements of all mission units, a comparison sequence is constructed; wherein, the comparison sequence F i ={f i (1), f i (2), ..., f i (m)}, i = 1, 2, ..., n, where n is the number of weapons and equipment, and m is the number of mission units;

[0174] Step S403: Obtain the correction coefficients based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence.

[0175] In other words, the reference sequence represents the satisfaction of weapons and equipment with each task unit under ideal conditions, i.e., the satisfaction level of the most ideal weapons and equipment; the comparison sequence represents the satisfaction level of a current weapon and equipment with each task unit. By substituting both into the improved gray entropy model, the correction coefficient can be obtained, which can ensure the accuracy of the correction coefficient and thus ensure the accuracy of the final first system contribution rate evaluation value range.

[0176] See Figure 5 Furthermore, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, based on the improved gray entropy model, reference series, and comparison series, includes the following steps to obtain the correction coefficient:

[0177] Step S501: Based on the first preset algorithm, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence, obtain the grey relational coefficient between the reference values ​​in the comparison sequence and the reference sequence.

[0178] In this embodiment, the first preset algorithm is preferably:

[0179]

[0180] Where ξ(F0, F i ) represents the grey relational coefficient;

[0181] F0 is the reference sequence. and These are reference values ​​for the degree of satisfaction of the first capability requirement for the preset task unit at different levels of task execution;

[0182] F i To compare sequences, and These represent the degree to which the target weapon system meets the primary capability requirements of the corresponding preset task units at different mission execution levels.

[0183] Step S502: Based on the second preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient, obtain the grey relational degree between the comparison sequence and the reference sequence;

[0184] In this embodiment, the second preset algorithm is preferably:

[0185]

[0186] Wherein, s(F0, F i ) represents the gray relational degree;

[0187] ξ(F0,F i ) represents the grey relational coefficient obtained above;

[0188] n represents the quantity of weapons and equipment.

[0189] Step S503: Based on the third preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient, obtain the balance degree of the sequence formed by the comparison sequence and the reference sequence;

[0190] In this embodiment, the third preset algorithm is preferably:

[0191]

[0192] Among them, J i For balance;

[0193] H(F) is the gray entropy; in this embodiment, the preferred method for obtaining the gray entropy is:

[0194]

[0195] Where ξ(F0, F i ) represents the grey relational coefficient obtained above;

[0196] n represents the quantity of weapons and equipment.

[0197] Step S504: Obtain the correction coefficient based on the fourth preset algorithm, grey relational degree, and balance degree.

[0198] In this embodiment, the fourth preset algorithm is preferably:

[0199] T i =s(F0, F i )×J i

[0200] Among them, T i This is a correction factor;

[0201] s(F0, F i The gray relational degree obtained above is denoted as .

[0202] J i The equilibrium obtained above.

[0203] In other words, proximity reflects the similarity between the reference sequence and the comparison sequence, while balance reflects the distribution density of the ordered discrete sequence. Based on proximity and balance, the balance proximity, or correction coefficient, is determined. It is a measure of the degree of balance between each comparison sequence and the reference sequence. The larger the correction coefficient, the stronger the correlation between the reference sequence and the comparison sequence.

[0204] See Figure 6 Preferably, the method for evaluating the system contribution rate as described above, the step of obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels, based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range, includes:

[0205] Step S601: Obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment of the same type as the target weapons and equipment from the weapon and equipment system;

[0206] Step S602: Based on the degree of task execution, determine the maximum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval as a positive ideal solution, and determine the minimum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval as a negative ideal solution.

[0207] Step S603: Based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm, obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value interval.

[0208] In other words, when obtaining the second system contribution rate assessment value range of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels, the same type of weapon system will be used as the reference range for assessment. This helps to ensure that the obtained second system contribution rate assessment value range is within a certain range. Specifically, the maximum value of the satisfaction of the first capability requirement of the mission unit by the same type of weapon system under the same mission execution level is taken as the positive ideal solution, i.e., the upper limit value, and the minimum value is taken as the negative ideal solution, i.e., the lower limit value. Then, these values ​​are substituted into the fifth preset algorithm for calculation to obtain the second system contribution rate assessment value range corresponding to multiple different mission execution levels.

[0209] See Figure 7 Specifically, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above includes the following steps for obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm:

[0210] Step 701: Obtain the range of group benefit values ​​corresponding to the target weapon and equipment based on the first sub-algorithm, task execution degree, first capability requirement satisfaction interval, positive ideal solution, and negative ideal solution in the fifth preset algorithm.

[0211] In this embodiment, the first sub-algorithm is preferably:

[0212]

[0213] Among them, S i (λ) represents the range of group benefit values, λ represents the value corresponding to the degree of task execution, and i represents the value corresponding to the target equipment.

[0214] The interval formed by the positive ideal solutions of different task execution degrees corresponding to the same task unit, where j is the value corresponding to the task unit and m is the number of task units;

[0215] The interval formed by negative ideal solutions of different task execution degrees corresponding to the same task unit;

[0216] f ij The range of first capability requirements satisfaction for the target weapons and equipment and mission units;

[0217] W j W represents the weight coefficients for the task units. Optionally, when it is not necessary to obtain the weight coefficients, W... j =1, when it is necessary to obtain the weight coefficients, W j The value obtained.

[0218] Step 702: Obtain the individual regret value range corresponding to the target weapon and equipment based on the second sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the degree of task execution, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution;

[0219] In this embodiment, the second sub-algorithm is preferably:

[0220]

[0221] Among them, R i (λ) represents the individual regret value range; for other symbols, please refer to the first sub-algorithm.

[0222] Step 703: Based on the third sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the group benefit value, and the individual regret value, obtain the range of the second system contribution rate evaluation value.

[0223] In this embodiment, the third sub-algorithm is preferably:

[0224]

[0225] Among them, S + It represents the maximum value within the range of group benefit values;

[0226] S - This represents the minimum value within the range of group benefit values.

[0227] R + It represents the maximum value within the range of individual regret values;

[0228] R - It represents the maximum value within the range of individual regret values;

[0229] v is the group benefit weight, and (1-v) is the individual regret weight. In a specific embodiment, v is preferably 0.5.

[0230] See Figure 8 Furthermore, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, before the step of obtaining the second system contribution rate assessment value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm, further includes:

[0231] Step 801: Obtain the weight coefficients of the target task unit;

[0232] Step 802: Based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, the fifth preset algorithm, and the weight coefficient, obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value interval.

[0233] In a preferred embodiment of this application, before obtaining the second system contribution rate assessment range, since different task units have different priorities in the mission, the weight coefficient of each task unit is obtained in advance. Then, after obtaining the weight coefficients, the second system contribution rate assessment range is obtained by combining the weight coefficients. The accuracy of the obtained second system contribution rate assessment range is further improved by using the weight coefficients of the task units.

[0234] See Figure 9 Preferably, in the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, the step of obtaining the weight coefficients of the target task unit includes:

[0235] Step 901: Obtain the subjective weight of the target task unit based on the subjective weighting values ​​obtained from the decision experts;

[0236] Step 902: Obtain the objective weight of the target task unit based on the interval center point distance method;

[0237] Step 903: Obtain the weight coefficients based on subjective weights, objective weights, and the sixth preset algorithm.

[0238] In another preferred embodiment of this application, when obtaining the weight coefficient of the target task unit, it is obtained by combining subjective weight and objective weight, so that the weight coefficient involves both subjective and objective opinions, thus ensuring the representativeness of the weight coefficient.

[0239] Specifically, subjective weights are determined based on the subjective weighting values ​​obtained from decision-making experts, while objective weights are determined based on the distance method of the interval center point.

[0240] In this embodiment, the sixth preset algorithm is preferably:

[0241]

[0242] Among them, W j For task unit j, the weight coefficient is denoted as ;

[0243] θ sj The subjective weight corresponding to task unit j;

[0244] θ kj Let j be the science fiction weight corresponding to task unit j.

[0245] See Figure 10 Specifically, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, in which the subjective weights of the target task units are obtained based on the subjective weighting values ​​acquired from decision-making experts, includes the following steps:

[0246] Step S1001: Perform a consistency check on the subjective weighting value according to the seventh preset algorithm, and obtain the check result;

[0247] Step S1002: When the test result shows consistency, determine the subjective weight based on the subjective weighting value.

[0248] Step S1003: When the test result is inconsistent, the subjective weighting value is re-acquired.

[0249] In another specific embodiment of this application, when obtaining subjective weights, a pre-set number of questionnaires are first sent to experts. Based on the returned questionnaires, the subjective weighting values ​​of multiple decision-making experts are determined. After obtaining the subjective weighting values ​​of the decision-making experts, a consistency check is performed on the obtained subjective weighting values ​​according to the seventh budget method, and the check result is obtained. If the check result shows consistency, it is determined that multiple experts agree on the priority of task units in the mission task. At this time, the obtained subjective weighting value can be determined as a valid value. Furthermore, the subjective weight can be determined by averaging or weighted averaging the subjective weighting values. If there is inconsistency, the obtained subjective weighting value is determined as an invalid value. Therefore, the subjective weighting value is obtained again by resending questionnaires, etc. Optionally, a pre-set number of subjective weighting values ​​can be discarded during the averaging or weighted averaging process. Preferably, the obtained subjective weighting values ​​are sorted in order of size, and if the values ​​are the same, they are arranged sequentially. The discarded subjective weighting values ​​are the values ​​at both ends of the sequence, and the number of discarded values ​​at both ends is the same.

[0250] Optionally, in this embodiment, the seventh preset algorithm is preferably the Kendall correlation coefficient, specifically:

[0251]

[0252] Where W is the Kendall correlation coefficient;

[0253] t represents the number of experts who assign the same weight;

[0254] R i Let be the sum of the rank of the i-th individual;

[0255] n represents the number of combat mission units;

[0256] m represents the number of decision-making experts.

[0257] Optionally, the step of obtaining the subjective weight of the target task unit based on the obtained subjective weighting value of the decision-making expert can also be as follows: obtain the positive coefficient of the decision-making expert, test the positive coefficient according to the preset positive coefficient threshold, and obtain the test result; wherein, the positive coefficient is the ratio of the number of questionnaires collected to the number of questionnaires issued; if the test result is that the positive coefficient is greater than or equal to the preset positive coefficient threshold, the collected questionnaires are determined to be valid, and the subjective weight is determined according to the subjective weighting value in the collected questionnaires, specifically including determining the subjective weight by averaging or weighted averaging; if the test result is that the positive coefficient is less than the preset positive coefficient threshold, the subjective weighting value is obtained again by resending or reissuing the survey questionnaires. Optionally, some subjective weighting values ​​can be discarded during the process of calculating the average or weighted average. Preferably, the obtained subjective weighting values ​​are sorted in order of size, and if the values ​​are the same, they are arranged sequentially. The discarded subjective weighting values ​​are the values ​​at both ends of the sequence, and the number of values ​​discarded at both ends is the same to reduce random errors. And / or the familiarity in the returned questionnaires is obtained, and subjective weighting values ​​with familiarity less than the familiarity threshold are discarded to reduce the impact of subjective weighting values ​​given by experts in non-corresponding fields on the final result.

[0258] See Figure 11 Furthermore, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on the interval center point distance method, includes the following steps for obtaining the objective weights of the capability requirement indicators for the target task unit:

[0259] Step S1101: Obtain the center point of the demand index interval according to the eighth preset algorithm;

[0260] In this embodiment, the eighth preset algorithm is preferably:

[0261]

[0262] Where m is the number of task units; j is the number of required capability types, j = 1, 2, ..., n.

[0263] Step S1102: According to the ninth preset algorithm, obtain the average value of the difference between each demand index and the center point in the demand index interval;

[0264] In this embodiment, the ninth preset algorithm is preferably:

[0265]

[0266] This is the average value.

[0267] Step S1103: Obtain objective weights through normalization processing.

[0268] The following algorithm is preferred for normalization:

[0269]

[0270] Where, θ kj Let be the objective weight corresponding to task unit j.

[0271] See Figure 12 Preferably, in the system contribution rate assessment method described above, after the step of correcting the second system contribution rate assessment value range according to the correction coefficient to obtain the first system contribution rate assessment value range, the method further includes:

[0272] Step S1201: Based on the first system contribution rate range of each weapon and equipment, obtain multiple lists of the same type of weapon and equipment sorted under multiple mission execution levels.

[0273] Step S1202: Determine the preferred weapon equipment based on preset inspection conditions and multiple lists.

[0274] In another preferred embodiment of this application, after obtaining the first system contribution rate evaluation value range of weapon equipment, the preferred weapon equipment for priority development will be obtained from the current weapon equipment system based on the first system contribution rate range of weapon equipment, so as to improve the applicability of the weapon equipment system.

[0275] Specifically, based on the first system contribution rate range of weaponry, multiple lists of weaponry of the same type are obtained and sorted under multiple mission execution levels. That is, the same type of weaponry is sorted from largest to smallest according to the first system contribution rate under different execution levels. Then, based on preset verification conditions, the preferred weaponry is determined from the lists corresponding to the multiple execution levels obtained above. This helps to ensure that the selected preferred weaponry has high adaptability to multiple execution levels.

[0276] See Figure 13 Specifically, the system contribution rate assessment method described above, based on preset verification conditions and multiple lists, includes the following steps for determining the preferred weapon equipment:

[0277] Step S1301: Obtain the verification parameters corresponding to each weapon and equipment according to the tenth preset algorithm;

[0278] Step S1302: Determine the preferred weapons and equipment based on the arrangement order of the weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters.

[0279] In this embodiment, the first preset algorithm is preferably:

[0280]

[0281] Where E i(λ) represents the verification parameter corresponding to a weapon system, G i (λ) represents the range of the first system contribution rate assessment value for weaponry and equipment.

[0282] Determining the optimal weaponry based on the sorting and verification parameters helps ensure the accuracy of the obtained optimal weaponry. The preset list corresponds to a task execution level.

[0283] See Figure 14 Furthermore, the system contribution rate evaluation method described above, based on the order of weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters, includes the following steps for determining the preferred weapons and equipment:

[0284] Step S1401: According to the arrangement order, obtain the difference between the second verification parameter corresponding to the latter weapon and the first verification parameter corresponding to the former weapon in two adjacent weapon systems.

[0285] Step S1402: When the difference is less than the preset value, determine that the two weapons and equipment corresponding to the difference are both preferred weapons and equipment.

[0286] Step S1403: When the difference is greater than or equal to the preset value, obtain the group benefit sequence and individual regret sequence of the next weapon and equipment and the previous weapon and equipment sorted according to the group benefit value and individual regret value;

[0287] Step S1404: When the order of the next weapon and the previous weapon after sorting according to the group benefit value and the individual regret value is the same as the order in the preset list, the previous weapon is determined to be the preferred weapon.

[0288] Step S1405: When the order of the next weapon and the previous weapon in the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence is different from the order in the preset list, both the previous weapon and the next weapon are determined to be preferred weapons.

[0289] In a preferred embodiment of this application, the difference between the second verification parameter corresponding to the latter weapon and the first verification parameter corresponding to the former weapon is obtained sequentially according to the arrangement order. If the difference is less than a preset value, it is determined that the two weapons have similar priorities or can be considered to have equivalent functions. Therefore, both are determined as preferred weapons, and the process proceeds to the step of judging the difference between the next set of two adjacent weapons. If the difference is greater than or equal to the preset value, the group benefit sequence and individual regret sequence of the latter and former weapons are obtained after sorting them according to the group benefit value and the maximum individual regret value. Then, based on the order of the latter and former weapons in the group benefit sequence and individual regret sequence, it is determined whether they are consistent with the order in the preset list. If the three are consistent, the former weapon is determined to be the preferred weapon. If the three are inconsistent, both weapons are determined to be preferred weapons.

[0290] It should be noted that the above intervals are a set of values ​​corresponding to different task execution levels. Changing the intervals to values ​​corresponding to different task execution levels is also within the scope of protection of this application.

[0291] See Figure 15 Another preferred embodiment of this application also provides a control device, including:

[0292] The first processing module 1501 is used to perform requirements analysis on the mission task to obtain at least one task unit and the capability requirements of the task unit. The capability requirements include: capability requirement type and the requirement index range corresponding to the capability requirement type under multiple task execution levels.

[0293] The second processing module 1502 is used to obtain at least one corresponding weapon and equipment and the inherent combat capabilities corresponding to the capability requirement type from the weapon and equipment system according to the capability requirements of each task unit.

[0294] The third processing module 1503 is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction interval of the target weapon equipment for each task unit based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capability of the target weapon equipment and the requirement index interval of the task unit.

[0295] The fourth processing module 1504 is used to obtain the first system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon equipment corresponding to the degree of execution of multiple tasks, based on the preset improved gray entropy model, VIKOR, first capability requirement satisfaction range and inherent combat capability.

[0296] Specifically, in the control device described above, the third processing module includes:

[0297] The first processing submodule is used to obtain the second capability requirement satisfaction interval of the target weapon equipment for each target capability requirement type in each task unit according to the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capability of the target and the requirement index interval.

[0298] The second processing submodule is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction interval based on the second capability requirement satisfaction interval corresponding to all target capability requirement types in the task unit.

[0299] Preferably, in the control device described above, the fourth processing module includes:

[0300] The third processing submodule is used to obtain a correction coefficient based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction range.

[0301] The fourth processing submodule is used to obtain the range of evaluation values ​​of the second system contribution rate of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels, based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range.

[0302] The fifth processing submodule is used to correct the contribution rate evaluation value range of the second system according to the correction coefficient, so as to obtain the contribution rate evaluation value range of the first system.

[0303] Specifically, in the control device described above, the third processing submodule includes:

[0304] The first processing unit is used to obtain reference values ​​of the demand index range of all task units and form a reference sequence. The reference values ​​are the maximum values ​​of the first capability demand satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment corresponding to the task units in the weapon and equipment system.

[0305] The second processing unit is used to construct a comparison sequence based on the target weapon system's satisfaction range of the first capability requirements of all mission units.

[0306] The third processing unit is used to obtain the correction coefficients based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence.

[0307] Furthermore, in the control device described above, the third processing unit includes:

[0308] The first processing subunit is used to obtain the grey relational coefficient between the reference value in the comparison sequence and the reference sequence according to the first preset algorithm, the reference sequence and the comparison sequence;

[0309] The second processing subunit is used to obtain the grey relational degree between the comparison sequence and the reference sequence according to the second preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient.

[0310] The third processing subunit is used to obtain the balance of the sequence formed by the comparison sequence and the reference sequence according to the third preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient.

[0311] The fourth processing subunit is used to obtain the correction coefficient based on the fourth preset algorithm, gray relational degree, and balance degree.

[0312] Preferably, in the control device described above, the fourth sub-processing module includes:

[0313] The fourth processing unit is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment of the same type as the target weapons and equipment from the weapon and equipment system.

[0314] The fifth processing unit is used to determine, based on the degree of task execution, the maximum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is a positive ideal solution, and the minimum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is a negative ideal solution;

[0315] The sixth processing unit is used to obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm.

[0316] Specifically, in the control device described above, the sixth processing unit includes:

[0317] The fifth processing subunit is used to obtain the range of group benefit values ​​corresponding to the target weapon and equipment based on the first sub-algorithm, the degree of task execution, the range of first capability requirement satisfaction, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution in the fifth preset algorithm.

[0318] The sixth processing subunit is used to obtain the individual regret value range corresponding to the target weapon and equipment based on the second sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the task execution degree, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution;

[0319] The seventh processing subunit is used to obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the third sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the group benefit value, and the individual regret value.

[0320] Furthermore, the control device described above also includes:

[0321] The fifth processing module is used to obtain the weight coefficients of the target task unit;

[0322] The sixth processing module is used to obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, the fifth preset algorithm, and the weight coefficient.

[0323] Preferably, in the control device described above, the fifth processing module includes:

[0324] The sixth processing submodule is used to obtain the subjective weight of the target task unit based on the subjective weighting values ​​obtained from the decision experts.

[0325] The seventh processing submodule is used to obtain the objective weight of the target task unit based on the distance method of the interval center point;

[0326] The eighth processing submodule is used to obtain the weight coefficients based on subjective weights, objective weights, and the sixth preset algorithm.

[0327] Specifically, in the control device described above, the sixth processing submodule includes:

[0328] The seventh processing unit is used to perform a consistency check on the subjective weighted values ​​according to the seventh preset algorithm and obtain the check result;

[0329] The eighth processing unit is used to determine the subjective weight based on the subjective weighting value when the test results are consistent.

[0330] The ninth processing unit is used to reacquire the subjective weighting value when the test result is inconsistent.

[0331] Furthermore, in the control device described above, the seventh processing submodule includes:

[0332] The tenth processing unit is used to obtain the center point of the demand index range according to the eighth preset algorithm;

[0333] The eleventh processing unit is used to obtain the average value of the difference between each demand indicator and the center point in the demand indicator range according to the ninth preset algorithm.

[0334] The twelfth processing unit is used to obtain objective weights through normalization.

[0335] Preferably, the control device described above further includes:

[0336] The seventh processing module is used to obtain multiple lists of weapons and equipment of the same type, sorted according to the first system contribution rate range of each weapon and equipment under multiple mission execution levels.

[0337] The eighth processing module is used to determine the preferred weapon equipment based on preset inspection conditions and multiple lists.

[0338] Specifically, in the control device described above, the eighth processing module includes:

[0339] The ninth processing submodule is used to obtain the verification parameters corresponding to each weapon and equipment according to the tenth preset algorithm;

[0340] The tenth processing submodule is used to determine the preferred weapons and equipment based on the arrangement order of weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters.

[0341] Furthermore, in the control device described above, the tenth processing submodule includes:

[0342] The thirteenth processing unit is used to sequentially obtain the difference between the second verification parameter corresponding to the latter weapon and the first verification parameter corresponding to the former weapon in two adjacent weapon systems according to the arrangement order.

[0343] The fourteenth processing unit is used to determine that when the difference is less than a preset value, both weapons and equipment corresponding to the difference are preferred weapons and equipment.

[0344] The fifteenth processing unit is used to obtain the order of the next weapon and equipment and the previous weapon and equipment under other mission execution levels when the difference is greater than or equal to the preset value.

[0345] The sixteenth processing unit is used to determine the former weapon as the preferred weapon when the order of the latter weapon and the former weapon after sorting according to the group benefit value and the individual regret value is the same as the order in the preset list.

[0346] The seventeenth processing unit is used to determine that both the preceding and following weapon systems are preferred weapon systems when the order of the preceding and following weapon systems after sorting based on group benefit value and individual regret value differs from the order in the preset list.

[0347] The embodiments of the control device of the present invention are systems corresponding to the embodiments of the above-described system contribution rate evaluation method. All implementation means in the embodiments of the above-described system contribution rate evaluation method are applicable to the embodiments of this control device and can achieve the same technical effect.

[0348] Another preferred embodiment of this application provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the system contribution rate evaluation method as described above.

[0349] Furthermore, reference numerals and / or letters may be repeated in different examples within this application. Such repetition is for the purpose of simplification and clarity and does not in itself indicate a relationship between the various embodiments and / or settings discussed.

[0350] It should also be noted that, in this document, relational terms such as "first" and "second" are used only to distinguish one entity or operation from another, and do not necessarily require or imply any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Furthermore, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion.

[0351] The above description is the preferred embodiment of this application. It should be noted that for those skilled in the art, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principles described in this application, and these improvements and modifications should also be considered within the scope of protection of this application.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the contribution rate of a system, characterized in that, include: A requirements analysis is performed on the mission task to obtain at least one task unit and the capability requirements of the task unit. The capability requirements include: capability requirement type and the requirement index range corresponding to the capability requirement type under multiple task execution levels. Based on the capability requirements of each of the mission units, at least one corresponding weapon system and the inherent combat capabilities of the weapon system corresponding to the capability requirement type are obtained from the weapon system. Based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capabilities of the target weapon and equipment, and the requirement index range of the task unit, the first capability requirement satisfaction range of the target weapon and equipment corresponding to each task unit is obtained. Based on the preset improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, and the multi-criteria compromise solution ranking method VIKOR, the first system contribution rate evaluation value interval corresponding to the target weapon equipment for multiple mission execution degrees is obtained. The step of obtaining the first system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system corresponding to multiple mission execution levels based on the preset improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, and the multi-criteria compromise solution ranking method VIKOR includes: Based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, a correction coefficient is obtained; Based on the VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range, obtain the second system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system for the weapon system under multiple mission execution levels; The contribution rate evaluation range of the second system is corrected according to the correction coefficient to obtain the contribution rate evaluation range of the first system. The step of obtaining a correction coefficient based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction includes: Obtain reference values ​​for the requirement index ranges of all the task units and form a reference sequence. The reference values ​​are the maximum values ​​in the first capability requirement satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment corresponding to the task units in the weapon and equipment system. A comparison sequence is formed based on the first capability requirement satisfaction range of the target weapon system for all the mission units; The correction coefficients are obtained based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence.

2. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the first capability requirement satisfaction interval of the target weapon system for each mission unit based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capability of the target weapon system, and the requirement index interval of the mission unit includes: Based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capability of the target, and the demand index range, obtain the second capability demand satisfaction range of the target weapon system for each target capability demand type in each of the mission units; The first capability requirement satisfaction interval is obtained based on the second capability requirement satisfaction interval corresponding to all the target capability requirement types in the task unit.

3. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the correction coefficient based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence includes: Based on the first preset algorithm, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence, a grey correlation coefficient is obtained between the comparison sequence and the reference values ​​in the reference sequence. The grey correlation degree between the comparison sequence and the reference sequence is obtained based on the second preset algorithm and the grey correlation coefficient. Based on the third preset algorithm and the grey relational coefficient, the balance degree of the sequence formed by the comparison sequence and the reference sequence is obtained; The correction coefficient is obtained based on the fourth preset algorithm, the gray relational degree, and the balance degree.

4. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels based on the VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range includes: Obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment of the same type as the target weapon and equipment from the weapon and equipment system; Based on the degree of task execution, the maximum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is determined to be a positive ideal solution, and the minimum value in the first capability requirement satisfaction interval is determined to be a negative ideal solution. The second system contribution rate evaluation value range is obtained based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm.

5. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution degree, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm includes: The group benefit value range corresponding to the target weapon and equipment is obtained based on the first sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the task execution degree, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution; The individual regret value range corresponding to the target weapon and equipment is obtained based on the second sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the task execution degree, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, and the negative ideal solution; Based on the third sub-algorithm in the fifth preset algorithm, the group benefit value, and the individual regret value, the range of the second system contribution rate evaluation value is obtained.

6. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 4 or 5, characterized in that, Before the step of obtaining the second system contribution rate evaluation value range based on the task execution level, the first capability requirement satisfaction range, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, and the fifth preset algorithm, the method further includes: Obtain the weight coefficients of the target task unit; The second system contribution rate evaluation value range is obtained based on the task execution degree, the first capability requirement satisfaction interval, the positive ideal solution, the negative ideal solution, the fifth preset algorithm, and the weight coefficient.

7. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 6, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the weight coefficients of the target task unit includes: The subjective weight of the target task unit is obtained based on the subjective weighting values ​​acquired from the decision-making experts. The objective weight of the target task unit is obtained based on the distance between the center points of the intervals. The weight coefficients are obtained based on the subjective weights, the objective weights, and the sixth preset algorithm.

8. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the subjective weight of the target task unit based on the obtained subjective weighting values ​​of the decision experts includes: The consistency of the subjective weighting values ​​is checked according to the seventh preset algorithm, and the check results are obtained. When the test result shows consistency, the subjective weight is determined based on the subjective weighting value. If the test result is inconsistent, the subjective weighting value is re-acquired.

9. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the objective weights of the capability requirement index of the target task unit based on the interval center point distance method includes: According to the eighth preset algorithm, obtain the center point of the demand index range; According to the ninth preset algorithm, the average value of the difference between each demand index and the center point in the demand index interval is obtained; The objective weights are obtained through normalization.

10. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, After the step of correcting the second system contribution rate assessment range according to the correction coefficient to obtain the first system contribution rate assessment range, the method further includes: Based on the first system contribution rate range of each weapon system, obtain multiple lists of the same type of weapon systems sorted under multiple mission execution levels. Based on preset testing conditions and multiple lists, preferred weapon systems are determined.

11. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 10, characterized in that, The step of determining the preferred weapon system based on preset testing conditions and multiple lists includes: The verification parameters corresponding to each weapon and equipment are obtained according to the tenth preset algorithm; The preferred weapons and equipment are determined based on the order of the weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters.

12. The system contribution rate evaluation method according to claim 11, characterized in that, The step of determining the preferred weapon or equipment based on the order of weapons and equipment in the preset list and the verification parameters includes: According to the arrangement order, the difference between the second verification parameter corresponding to the next weapon and the first verification parameter corresponding to the previous weapon is obtained sequentially. When the difference is less than a preset value, it is determined that both weapons and equipment corresponding to the difference are preferred weapons and equipment. When the difference is greater than or equal to the preset value, obtain the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence after sorting the next weapon and the previous weapon according to the group benefit value and the individual regret value; When the order of the latter weapon and the former weapon in the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence is the same as the order in the preset list, the former weapon is determined to be the preferred weapon. When the order of the latter weapon and the former weapon in the group benefit sequence and the individual regret sequence differs from the order in the preset list, both the former weapon and the latter weapon are determined to be the preferred weapon.

13. A control device, characterized in that, include: The first processing module is used to perform requirements analysis on the mission task to obtain at least one task unit and the capability requirements of the task unit, wherein the capability requirements include: capability requirement type and the requirement index range corresponding to the capability requirement type under multiple task execution levels. The second processing module is used to obtain at least one corresponding weapon system and the inherent combat capability of the weapon system corresponding to the capability requirement type from the weapon system according to the capability requirements of each task unit. The third processing module is used to obtain the first capability requirement satisfaction interval of the target weapon equipment for each of the mission units based on the preset satisfaction function, the inherent combat capability of the target weapon equipment, and the requirement index interval of the mission unit. The fourth processing module is used to obtain the first system contribution rate evaluation value range of the target weapon system corresponding to the degree of execution of multiple tasks based on the preset improved gray entropy model, the first capability requirement satisfaction range and the multi-criteria compromise solution ranking method VIKOR. The fourth processing module includes: The third processing submodule is used to obtain a correction coefficient based on the improved gray entropy model and the first capability requirement satisfaction range. The fourth processing submodule is used to obtain the range of evaluation values ​​of the second system contribution rate of the target weapon system under multiple mission execution levels, based on VIKOR and the first capability requirement satisfaction range. The fifth processing submodule is used to correct the contribution rate evaluation value range of the second system according to the correction coefficient to obtain the contribution rate evaluation value range of the first system. The third processing submodule includes: The first processing unit is used to obtain reference values ​​of the demand index range of all task units and form a reference sequence. The reference values ​​are the maximum values ​​of the first capability demand satisfaction range of all weapons and equipment corresponding to the task units in the weapon and equipment system. The second processing unit is used to construct a comparison sequence based on the target weapon system's satisfaction range of the first capability requirements of all mission units. The third processing unit is used to obtain the correction coefficients based on the improved gray entropy model, the reference sequence, and the comparison sequence.

14. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, A computer program is stored on the computer-readable storage medium, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the system contribution rate evaluation method as described in any one of claims 1 to 12.

Images