System confrontation effectiveness evaluation method and device

Abstract

The invention discloses a system confrontation efficiency evaluation method and device. The method comprises the following steps: constructing a system confrontation efficiency evaluation index set; the system confrontation efficiency evaluation index set comprises a task completion capability index, an information processing capability index and a cooperation capability index; the task completion capability indexes comprise maneuverability, data acquisition duration, receiving and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility; the information processing capability indexes comprise information acquisition performance, information processing performance, information transmission performance and information utilization performance; the cooperative capability indexes comprise support guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, man-machine associativity and system software interface friendliness; and processing the system confrontation efficiency evaluation index set by using a system confrontation efficiency evaluation model to obtain a system confrontation efficiency evaluation result. According to the invention, experimental means and evaluation data are provided for efficiency evaluation of a simulation system under different backgrounds.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of effectiveness evaluation, and in particular to a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method and device. Background Art

[0002] There is currently a lack of evaluation methods that are combined with application scenarios for performance evaluation of specific simulation systems under complex natural environmental factors, which cannot meet the needs of effectively evaluating the system's analysis application scenario capabilities.

[0003] Therefore, according to the system engineering idea, for different typical application scenarios, starting from system simulation to support business applications, how to build a system performance evaluation framework and design a system performance evaluation process for typical application scenarios has become a technical problem that urgently needs to be solved by existing technologies. Summary of the invention

[0004] The technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a system adversarial effectiveness evaluation method and device, which are used to build a system effectiveness evaluation framework for different typical application scenarios based on system simulation supporting business applications, and design a system effectiveness evaluation process for typical application scenarios.

[0005] In order to solve the above technical problems, a first aspect of an embodiment of the present invention discloses a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method, the method comprising:

[0006] S1, constructing a set of system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicators; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set includes task completion capability indicators, information processing capability indicators, and coordination capability indicators;

[0007] The task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility;

[0008] The information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization;

[0009] The collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness;

[0010] S2, using a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0011] As an optional implementation, in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0012] S21, processing the task completion capability index to obtain a task completion capability index judgment matrix A;

[0013] S22, processing the information processing capability indicator to obtain an information processing capability indicator judgment matrix B;

[0014] S23, processing the collaborative capability index to obtain a collaborative capability index judgment matrix C;

[0015] S24, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the coordination capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0016] As an optional implementation, in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the processing of the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the collaboration capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result includes:

[0017] S241, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A to obtain a weight vector w a ;

[0018] S242, processing the information processing capability index judgment matrix B to obtain a weight vector w b ;

[0019] S243, processing the collaborative capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a weight vector w c ;

[0020] S244, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E;

[0021] S245, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain the task completion capability index membership, information processing capability index membership, and coordination capability index membership;

[0022] The task completion capability index membership includes mobility membership, data acquisition time membership, reception and transmission efficiency membership, data completeness membership, data loading rate membership, economy membership and compatibility membership;

[0023] The information processing capability index membership includes information acquisition membership, information processing membership, information transmission membership and information utilization membership;

[0024] The collaborative capability index membership includes the support and guarantee capability membership, high-performance computer processing capability membership, comprehensive guarantee capability membership, human-computer integration membership, and system software interface friendliness membership;

[0025] S246, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1;

[0026] S247, the weight vector w b and the information processing capability indicator membership degree to obtain an information processing capability evaluation value S2;

[0027] S248, the weight vector w c and the collaborative capability indicator membership degree to obtain a collaborative capability evaluation value S3;

[0028] S249, processing the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0029] As an optional implementation, in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A is processed to obtain a weight vector w a ,include:

[0030] S2411, standardizing the elements in the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A to obtain element standardized values;

[0031] The element standardized value expression is:

[0032]

[0033] Among them, r ip ∈[0,1],x ip is the measured value of the pth evaluation object for the i-th evaluation factor in the judgment matrix A, max{x ip} is the maximum value among all evaluation objects, min{x ip} is the minimum value among all evaluation objects;

[0034] S2412, processing the standardized value of the element to obtain the entropy of the evaluation factor;

[0035] The entropy H of the i-th evaluation factor i The expression is:

[0036]

[0037] in,

[0038] S2413, processing the entropy of the evaluation factor to obtain a weight vector w a ;

[0039] The weight vector w a The weight of the i-th evaluation factor is:

[0040]

[0041] Among them, ω i ∈[0,1], w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ].

[0042] As an optional implementation, in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the system resistance effectiveness evaluation matrix E is:

[0043] E=[w1,w2,w3]

[0044] Among them, w1 is the weight of the task completion capability index, w2 is the weight of the information processing capability index, w3 is the weight of the collaboration capability index, and w1+w2+w3=1.

[0045] As an optional implementation, in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the weight vector w a The task completion capability index value S1 is obtained by processing the task completion capability index value S1, including:

[0046] Using the task completion capability evaluation model, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1;

[0047] The task completion capability evaluation model expression is:

[0048]

[0049] Among them, w i is the weight vector w a =[∈1,∈2,…,ω n ], the i-th element in u i (x) is the corresponding element in the task completion capability indicator membership.

[0050] As an optional implementation, in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the collaboration capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0051] Using a comprehensive evaluation model, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result;

[0052] The comprehensive evaluation model is:

[0053]

[0054] Among them, w l is the corresponding element in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E = [w1, w2, w3], and S is the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0055] A second aspect of an embodiment of the present invention discloses a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device, the device comprising:

[0056] An evaluation index set construction module is used to construct a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set includes a task completion capability index, an information processing capability index, and a coordination capability index;

[0057] The task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility;

[0058] The information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization;

[0059] The collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness;

[0060] The evaluation module is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set by using the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0061] As an optional implementation, in the second aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0062] S21, processing the task completion capability index to obtain a task completion capability index judgment matrix A;

[0063] S22, processing the information processing capability indicator to obtain an information processing capability indicator judgment matrix B;

[0064] S23, processing the collaborative capability index to obtain a collaborative capability index judgment matrix C;

[0065] S24, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the coordination capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0066] As an optional implementation, in the second aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the collaboration capability index judgment matrix C are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0067] S241, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A to obtain a weight vector w a ;

[0068] S242, processing the information processing capability index judgment matrix B to obtain a weight vector w b ;

[0069] S243, processing the collaborative capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a weight vector w c ;

[0070] S244, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E;

[0071] S245, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain the task completion capability index membership, information processing capability index membership, and coordination capability index membership;

[0072] The task completion capability index membership includes mobility membership, data acquisition time membership, reception and transmission efficiency membership, data completeness membership, data loading rate membership, economy membership and compatibility membership;

[0073] The information processing capability index membership includes information acquisition membership, information processing membership, information transmission membership and information utilization membership;

[0074] The collaborative capability index membership includes the support and guarantee capability membership, high-performance computer processing capability membership, comprehensive guarantee capability membership, human-computer integration membership, and system software interface friendliness membership;

[0075] S246, the weight vector wa and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1;

[0076] S247, the weight vector w b and the information processing capability indicator membership degree to obtain an information processing capability evaluation value S2;

[0077] S248, the weight vector w c and the collaborative capability indicator membership degree to obtain a collaborative capability evaluation value S3;

[0078] S249, processing the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0079] As an optional implementation, in the second aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A is processed to obtain a weight vector w a ,include:

[0080] S2411, standardizing the elements in the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A to obtain element standardized values;

[0081] The element standardized value expression is:

[0082]

[0083] Among them, r ip ∈[0,1],x ip is the measured value of the pth evaluation object for the i-th evaluation factor in the judgment matrix A, max{x ip} is the maximum value among all evaluation objects, min{x ip} is the minimum value among all evaluation objects;

[0084] S2412, processing the standardized value of the element to obtain the entropy of the evaluation factor;

[0085] The entropy H of the i-th evaluation factor i The expression is:

[0086]

[0087] in,

[0088] S2413, processing the entropy of the evaluation factor to obtain a weight vector w a ;

[0089] The weight vector w a The weight of the i-th evaluation factor is:

[0090]

[0091] Among them, ω i ∈[0,1], w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ].

[0092] As an optional implementation, in the second aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the system resistance effectiveness evaluation matrix E is:

[0093] E=[w1,w2,w3]

[0094] Among them, w1 is the weight of the task completion capability index, w2 is the weight of the information processing capability index, w3 is the weight of the collaboration capability index, and w1+w2+w3=1.

[0095] As an optional implementation, in the second aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the weight vector w a The task completion capability index value S1 is obtained by processing the task completion capability index value S1, including:

[0096] Using the task completion capability evaluation model, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1;

[0097] The task completion capability evaluation model expression is:

[0098]

[0099] Among them, w i is the weight vector w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ], the i-th element in u i (x) is the corresponding element in the task completion capability indicator membership.

[0100] As an optional implementation, in the second aspect of the embodiment of the present invention, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the collaboration capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0101] Using a comprehensive evaluation model, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result;

[0102] The comprehensive evaluation model is:

[0103]

[0104] Among them, w l is the corresponding element in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E = [w1, w2, w3], and S is the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0105] The third aspect of the present invention discloses another system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device, the device comprising:

[0106] A memory storing executable program code;

[0107] a processor coupled to the memory;

[0108] The processor calls the executable program code stored in the memory to execute part or all of the steps in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method disclosed in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention.

[0109] The fourth aspect of the present invention discloses a computer storable medium, which stores computer instructions. When the computer instructions are called, they are used to execute some or all of the steps in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method disclosed in the first aspect of the embodiment of the present invention.

[0110] Compared with the prior art, the embodiments of the present invention have the following beneficial effects:

[0111] The present invention proposes a system adversarial effectiveness evaluation method, which uses system simulation to provide experimental means and evaluation data for effectiveness evaluation of simulation systems in different backgrounds, thereby achieving the triple goals of supporting accurate system effectiveness evaluation, accurate system technology selection, and accurate system concept demonstration, and providing scientific, quantitative, and visual support for the simulation system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0112] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the accompanying drawings required for use in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other accompanying drawings can be obtained based on these accompanying drawings without paying creative work.

[0113] Figure 1 It is a flow chart of a method for evaluating system resistance effectiveness disclosed in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0114] Figure 2 It is a structural schematic diagram of a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device disclosed in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0115] Figure 3 It is a structural schematic diagram of another system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device disclosed in an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0116] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the scheme of the present invention, the technical scheme in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0117] The terms "first", "second", etc. in the specification and claims of the present invention and the above-mentioned drawings are used to distinguish different objects, rather than to describe a specific order. In addition, the terms "including" and "having" and any variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions. For example, a process, method, device, product or equipment that includes a series of steps or units is not limited to the listed steps or units, but may optionally include steps or units that are not listed, or may optionally include other steps or units that are inherent to these processes, methods, products or equipment.

[0118] Reference to "embodiments" herein means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in conjunction with the embodiments may be included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. The appearance of the phrase in various places in the specification does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment, nor is it an independent or alternative embodiment that is mutually exclusive with other embodiments. It is explicitly and implicitly understood by those skilled in the art that the embodiments described herein may be combined with other embodiments.

[0119] The present invention discloses a method and device for evaluating the effectiveness of a system confrontation. The method includes: constructing a set of system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicators; the set of system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicators includes task completion capability indicators, information processing capability indicators, and collaborative capability indicators; the task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy, and compatibility; the information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission, and information utilization; the collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capabilities, high-performance computer processing capabilities, comprehensive guarantee capabilities, human-machine integration, and system software interface friendliness; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model is used to process the set of system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicators to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result. The present invention provides experimental means and evaluation data for the effectiveness evaluation of simulation systems under different backgrounds. The following are detailed descriptions.

[0120] Embodiment 1

[0121] See also Figure 1 , Figure 1 : is a flow chart of a method for evaluating system resistance effectiveness disclosed in an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 1 The system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method described is applied to the field of system effectiveness evaluation technology, and the embodiments of the present invention are not limited thereto. Figure 1 As shown, the system resistance effectiveness evaluation method may include the following operations:

[0122] S1, constructing a set of system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicators; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set includes task completion capability indicators, information processing capability indicators, and coordination capability indicators;

[0123] The task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility;

[0124] The information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization;

[0125] The collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness;

[0126] Among them, the countermeasure effectiveness evaluation index needs to be set according to the specific tasks and task scenarios;

[0127] In the present invention, specific tasks and scenarios of system confrontation may include: air-to-ground rescue tasks, close air support tasks, etc. Under the respective task backgrounds, the percentage of tasks that can be completed under the constraints of task completion capability, information processing capability, and coordination capability can be achieved. Close air support tasks can be further divided into planned close air support tasks, emergency close air support tasks, and pre-positioned close air support tasks, which are not limited in this embodiment.

[0128] S2, using a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0129] Optionally, the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0130] S21, processing the task completion capability index to obtain a task completion capability index judgment matrix A;

[0131] S22, processing the information processing capability indicator to obtain an information processing capability indicator judgment matrix B;

[0132] S23, processing the collaborative capability index to obtain a collaborative capability index judgment matrix C;

[0133] S24, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the coordination capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0134] First, construct a review set V containing 5 levels, V = {v1, v2, v3, v4, v5}, v1 represents very bad, v2 represents poor, v3 represents average, v4 represents good, and v5 represents very good; for the convenience of calculation, they can be assigned a value between 0 and 1.

[0135] Taking the task completion capability index judgment matrix A as an example, a judging group consisting of L individuals is established. Each member of the judging group gives a grade to each indicator in the task completion capability index, specifically, an evaluation value of the evaluation object for the evaluation factor is given. The grade comes from one and only one grade in V = {v1, v2, v3, v4, v5}. The weighted average of the evaluation results of L individuals constitutes the element value in the matrix A.

[0136] The processing method for matrix B and matrix C is the same as that for matrix A.

[0137] Optionally, after obtaining the indicator judgment matrix A, indicator judgment matrix B and indicator judgment matrix C, a consistency check is required. The consistency check method is: taking matrix A as an example, assuming that A is an n-order judgment matrix, λ max is the largest eigenvalue of A. If

[0138]

[0139] Then A is called consistency acceptable. Here α is the critical value of the consistency acceptable judgment matrix, generally α = 0.1; CR, CI, RI are the consistency ratio, consistency index, and average random consistency index of the judgment matrix, respectively, where the size of RI is related to n, as shown in the following table.

[0140] Random Consistency Index Table

[0141] Order n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 RI 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45

[0142] The smaller the consistency ratio CR, the higher the quality of the judgment matrix; conversely, the more serious the logical conflict of the judgment matrix, the lower the quality. If the judgment matrix A is acceptable in consistency, the weight vector of the corresponding factor should satisfy

[0143] Aξ=λ max ζ

[0144] Where ζ is a preset parameter.

[0145] The indicator judgment matrix that does not meet the consistency test needs to be recalculated.

[0146] Optionally, the processing of the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B, and the coordination capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result includes:

[0147] S241, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A to obtain a weight vector w a ;

[0148] S242, processing the information processing capability index judgment matrix B to obtain a weight vector w b ;

[0149] S243, processing the collaborative capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a weight vector w c ;

[0150] S244, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E;

[0151] S245, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain the task completion capability index membership, information processing capability index membership, and coordination capability index membership;

[0152] The task completion capability index membership includes mobility membership, data acquisition time membership, reception and transmission efficiency membership, data completeness membership, data loading rate membership, economy membership and compatibility membership;

[0153] The information processing capability index membership includes information acquisition membership, information processing membership, information transmission membership and information utilization membership;

[0154] The collaborative capability index membership includes the support and guarantee capability membership, high-performance computer processing capability membership, comprehensive guarantee capability membership, human-computer integration membership, and system software interface friendliness membership;

[0155] S246, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1;

[0156] S247, the weight vector w b and the information processing capability indicator membership degree to obtain an information processing capability evaluation value S2;

[0157] S248, the weight vector w c and the collaborative capability indicator membership degree to obtain a collaborative capability evaluation value S3;

[0158] S249, processing the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0159] Optionally, the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A is processed to obtain a weight vector w a ,include:

[0160] S2411, standardizing the elements in the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A to obtain element standardized values;

[0161] The element standardized value expression is:

[0162]

[0163] Among them, r ip ∈[0,1],x ipis the measured value of the pth evaluation object for the i-th evaluation factor in the judgment matrix A, max{x ip} is the maximum value among all evaluation objects, min{x ip} is the minimum value among all evaluation objects;

[0164] The p evaluation objects are set by specific tasks, and the evaluation factors are mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility; information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization; support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-machine integration, system software interface friendliness, etc.; and the preset mission scenarios and tasks are evaluated in a specified space, specified area, and specified time (period).

[0165] S2412, processing the standardized value of the element to obtain the entropy of the evaluation factor;

[0166] The entropy H of the i-th evaluation factor i The expression is:

[0167]

[0168] in, n is the number of evaluation factors, s is the number of evaluation objects;

[0169] S2413, processing the entropy of the evaluation factor to obtain a weight vector w a ;

[0170] The weight vector w a The weight of the i-th evaluation factor is:

[0171]

[0172] Among them, ω i ∈[0,1], w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ].

[0173] The processing method for judgment matrix B and judgment matrix C is the same as steps S2411 to S2413.

[0174] Optionally, the system resistance effectiveness evaluation matrix E is:

[0175] E=[w1,w2,w3]

[0176] Among them, w1 is the weight of the task completion capability index, w2 is the weight of the information processing capability index, w3 is the weight of the collaboration capability index, and w1+w2+w3=1.

[0177] The weights of the task completion capability index, the information processing capability index, and the coordination capability index are set by the experiment.

[0178] Optionally, the weight vector w a The task completion capability index membership is processed to obtain the task completion capability evaluation value S1, including:

[0179] Using the task completion capability evaluation model, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1;

[0180] The task completion capability evaluation model expression is:

[0181]

[0182] Among them, w i is the weight vector w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ], the i-th element in u i (x) is the corresponding element in the task completion capability index membership. a =(w1,w2,w3,w4,w5,w6,w7).

[0183] Establish the membership functions of 16 evaluation factors u1(x), u2(x), u3(x), u4(x), u5(x), u6(x), u7(x), u8(x), u9(x), u 10 (x),u 11 (x),u 12 (x),u 13 (x),u 14 (x),u 15 (x),u 16 (x).

[0184] Optionally, the membership function is a, b are preset thresholds, μ A represents the membership value;

[0185] The information processing capability is evaluated as w b =(w8,w9,w 10 ,w 11 ) is the weight vector of the judgment matrix B;

[0186] The collaborative ability evaluation value is w c =(w 12 ,w13 ,w 14 ,w 15 ,w 16 ) is the weight vector of the judgment matrix C;

[0187] Optionally, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including:

[0188] Using a comprehensive evaluation model, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result;

[0189] The comprehensive evaluation model is:

[0190]

[0191] Among them, w l is the corresponding element in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E = [w1, w2, w3], and S is the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0192] After obtaining the system resistance effectiveness evaluation result S, the following parameters can be further calculated:

[0193] The average network connectivity Z is defined as:

[0194] The network constructed by this system confrontation task is processed using the network average connectivity calculation model to obtain the network average connectivity Z; the network average connectivity calculation model is:

[0195]

[0196] in, i=1,2,…,n, where n is the undirected connectivity of the network constructed for this system confrontation task

[0197] The number of nodes in the graph G, G = (V, E), V = {v1, v2, ..., v n} is a set of nodes in the undirected connected graph G, v1,v2,…,v n represents n nodes, For edge sets, Represents node v i With node v j The lth, 0≤l≤m ij Direct links, m ij For node v i With node v j The number of direct links betweenij For node v i With node v j The degree of connectivity between

[0198] Using node v i With node v j The connectivity calculation model between nodes v i With node v j The connectivity between ij ; The node v i With node v j The calculation model of the connectivity between is:

[0199]

[0200] in For node v i With node v j The indirect connectivity between them, k is the number of hops, j=1,2,…,n.

[0201] Network survivability is defined as:

[0202] Use the method of randomly attacking network nodes to attack the network constructed by this system confrontation task N times;

[0203] Calculate the average connectivity of the network constructed by the system confrontation task after N attacks to obtain the network invulnerability ZL.

[0204] The comprehensive evaluation result W is:

[0205] W=S×γ1+Z×γ2+ZL×γ3

[0206] Among them, γ1+γ2+γ3=1, γ1, γ2, and γ3 are weight coefficients, which are set by experiments. The comprehensive evaluation result W is normalized to between 0 and 1. The larger the value of S, the better the comprehensive evaluation result.

[0207] It can be seen that the present invention proposes a system adversarial effectiveness evaluation method, which, by means of system simulation, provides experimental means and evaluation data for the effectiveness evaluation of the simulation system in different backgrounds, thereby achieving the triple goals of supporting accurate system effectiveness evaluation, accurate system technology selection, and accurate system concept demonstration, and providing scientific, quantitative, and visual support for the simulation system.

[0208] Embodiment 2

[0209] Optionally, the weights of indicators such as mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility; information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization; support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-machine integration, and system software interface friendliness can be calculated as follows:

[0210] (1) Given a set of indicators x = {x1, x2, …, x p}, p is the number of indicators in the indicator set;

[0211] (2) Calculate the correlation coefficient set R of set x:

[0212]

[0213] where r ij ,i,j=1,2,…,p is x i and x j The correlation coefficient of

[0214] (3) Solve the characteristic equation |λE-R|=0, where E is the unit matrix, obtain the eigenvalues, and sort the eigenvalues ​​λ1≥λ2…≥λ p ≥0, find the eigenvector e corresponding to the eigenvalue i , i=1,2,…,p;

[0215] (4) Calculate the cumulative contribution rate based on the eigenvalue:

[0216]

[0217] Select the eigenvalues ​​λ1,λ2…λ whose contribution rate exceeds 95% m The corresponding m principal components;

[0218] (5) Calculate the coefficient l of the original index in the linear combination of different components ij :

[0219]

[0220] where e ij is the i-th principal component for the original index x j The number of loads, i = 1, 2, ..., m, j = 1, 2, ..., p;

[0221] (6) Calculate the principal component contribution rate

[0222]

[0223] (7) Calculate the coefficient of the original indicator in the comprehensive model

[0224]

[0225] (8) Normalization of indicator weights

[0226]

[0227] Optionally, the following performance evaluation model may be constructed, and the performance evaluation model is:

[0228] (1) Solution level: a total of 16 evaluation factors, including: mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility; information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization; support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness;

[0229] (2) Middle layer: Based on the characteristics and influencing methods of these 16 factors, these factors are classified and summarized into three categories: task completion ability, information processing ability, and collaborative ability;

[0230] (3) Top layer: This layer is the final result to be obtained, which is the quantitative value of the system's combat effectiveness evaluation result.

[0231] Construct a judgment matrix: Analyze the mobility of task completion capability, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility indicators, give the comparison results of importance, and construct a task completion capability judgment matrix A; use the same analysis method to obtain the information processing capability judgment matrix B, the collaborative capability judgment matrix C, and further obtain the highest-level system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result judgment matrix D.

[0232] For the judgment matrix A, determine the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix and the eigenvector corresponding to the maximum eigenvalue, that is, the eigenvector that satisfies the following relationship, and the corresponding eigenvector AW:

[0233] AW=λ max W

[0234] In the formula, λ max To determine the maximum eigenvalue of matrix A, where W is the eigenvector corresponding to the maximum eigenvalue. Calculate the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix and the eigenvector corresponding to the maximum eigenvalue, and normalize the eigenvector to find the weight of each element in the next layer relative to the upper layer index controlled by it. The calculation steps are as follows:

[0235] Calculate the geometric mean of all elements in each row of the judgment matrix A:

[0236]

[0237] get a ij To determine the element in the i-th row and j-th column of the matrix A, Normalization, that is

[0238]

[0239] Get a weight vector w=(w1,w2,...w n ), the weight vector is the approximation of the relative weight of the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenroot, that is, the relative weight of the next layer element to the previous layer;

[0240] Calculate the maximum eigenvalue λ of the judgment matrix max :

[0241]

[0242] Among them (AW) i is the i-th element of vector AW, with a total of n elements. The processing method for matrices B, C, and D is the same as that for A.

[0243] The judgment matrices A, B, and C are checked for consistency. Finally, the weight vector of each layer of the three judgment matrices A, B, and C relative to the previous layer can be obtained. According to the method of finding the eigenvector, the weight vector of each layer is finally obtained as w a =(w1,w2,w3,w4,w5,w6,w70,w b =(w8,w9,w 10 ,w 11 ), w c =(w 12 ,w 13 ,w 14 ,w 15 ,w 16 ), we can get the weights of the 16 evaluation factors relative to the previous layer. We can get the weight vectors w of each layer of the matrix D of the task completion capability index, information processing capability index, and coordination capability index for the highest level system confrontation effectiveness evaluation results. d =(w d1 ,w d2 ,w d3 ).

[0244] Establish the membership functions of 16 evaluation factors u1(x), u2(x), u3(x), u4(x), u5(x), u6(x), u7(x), u8(x), u9(x), u 10 (x),u 11 (x),u 12 (x),u 13 (x),u 14(x),u 15 (x),u 16 (x).

[0245] Optionally, the membership function is a and b are preset thresholds;

[0246] The task completion ability evaluation value is

[0247] The information processing capability is evaluated as

[0248] The comprehensive weight of collaborative ability is

[0249] The quantitative value of the system's resistance effectiveness evaluation result is:

[0250] Embodiment 3

[0251] See also Figure 2 , Figure 2 Schematic diagram of a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device disclosed in an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 2 The system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device described is applied to the technical field of system effectiveness evaluation, and the embodiments of the present invention are not limited thereto. Figure 2 As shown, the system resistance effectiveness evaluation device may include the following operations:

[0252] S301, an evaluation index set construction module, used to construct a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set includes a task completion capability index, an information processing capability index, and a coordination capability index;

[0253] The task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility;

[0254] The information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization;

[0255] The collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness;

[0256] S302, an evaluation module is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set using a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

[0257] It can be seen that the present invention proposes a system adversarial effectiveness evaluation method, which, by means of system simulation, provides experimental means and evaluation data for the effectiveness evaluation of the simulation system in different backgrounds, thereby achieving the triple goals of supporting accurate system effectiveness evaluation, accurate system technology selection, and accurate system concept demonstration, and providing scientific, quantitative, and visual support for the simulation system.

[0258] Embodiment 4

[0259] See also Figure 3 , Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the structure of another system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device disclosed in an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 3 The system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device described is applied to the technical field of system effectiveness evaluation, and the embodiments of the present invention are not limited thereto. Figure 3 As shown, the system resistance effectiveness evaluation device may include the following operations:

[0260] A memory 401 storing executable program codes;

[0261] a processor 402 coupled to the memory 401;

[0262] The processor 402 calls the executable program code stored in the memory 401 to execute the steps in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method described in the first and second embodiments.

[0263] Embodiment 5

[0264] An embodiment of the present invention discloses a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program for electronic data exchange, wherein the computer program enables a computer to execute the steps of the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method described in the first and second embodiments.

[0265] The device embodiments described above are only illustrative, wherein the modules described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components displayed as modules may or may not be physical modules, i.e., they may be located in one place, or they may be distributed on multiple network modules. Some or all of the modules may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the scheme of this embodiment. Those of ordinary skill in the art may understand and implement it without creative work.

[0266] Through the specific description of the above embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that each implementation method can be implemented by means of software plus a necessary general hardware platform, and of course, it can also be implemented by hardware. Based on such an understanding, the above technical solution can be essentially or partly contributed to the prior art in the form of a software product, and the computer software product can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, and the storage medium includes a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a programmable read-only memory (PROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), a one-time programmable read-only memory (OTPROM), an electronically erasable rewritable read-only memory (EEPROM), a compact disc (CD-ROM) or other optical disc storage, magnetic disk storage, magnetic tape storage, or any other computer-readable medium that can be used to carry or store data.

[0267] Finally, it should be noted that the method and device for evaluating system resistance effectiveness disclosed in the embodiments of the present invention disclose only the preferred embodiments of the present invention, which are only used to illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, rather than to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the aforementioned embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that the technical solutions described in the aforementioned embodiments can still be modified, or some of the technical features can be replaced by equivalents. However, these modifications or replacements do not deviate the essence of the corresponding technical solutions from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating system resistance effectiveness, characterized in that: The method comprises: S1, constructing a set of system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicators; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set includes task completion capability indicators, information processing capability indicators, and coordination capability indicators; The task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility; The information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization; The collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness; S2, using a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation indicator set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

2. The system resistance effectiveness evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result, including: S21, processing the task completion capability index to obtain a task completion capability index judgment matrix A; S22, processing the information processing capability indicator to obtain an information processing capability indicator judgment matrix B; S23, processing the collaborative capability index to obtain a collaborative capability index judgment matrix C; S24, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the coordination capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

3. The system resistance effectiveness evaluation method according to claim 2, characterized in that: The processing of the task completion capability index judgment matrix A, the information processing capability index judgment matrix B and the coordination capability index judgment matrix C to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result includes: S241, processing the task completion capability index judgment matrix A to obtain a weight vector w a ; S242, processing the information processing capability index judgment matrix B to obtain a weight vector w b ; S243, processing the collaborative capability index judgment matrix C to obtain a weight vector w c ; S244, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E; S245, processing the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set to obtain the task completion capability index membership, information processing capability index membership, and coordination capability index membership; The task completion capability index membership includes mobility membership, data acquisition time membership, reception and transmission efficiency membership, data completeness membership, data loading rate membership, economy membership and compatibility membership; The information processing capability index membership includes information acquisition membership, information processing membership, information transmission membership and information utilization membership; The collaborative capability index membership includes the support and guarantee capability membership, high-performance computer processing capability membership, comprehensive guarantee capability membership, human-computer integration membership, and system software interface friendliness membership; S246, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability indicator membership degree to obtain a task completion capability evaluation value S1; S247, the weight vector w b and the information processing capability indicator membership degree to obtain an information processing capability evaluation value S2; S248, the weight vector w c and the collaborative capability indicator membership degree to obtain a collaborative capability evaluation value S3; S249, processing the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

4. The system resistance effectiveness evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The task completion capability index judgment matrix A is processed to obtain the weight vector w a ,include: S2411, standardizing the elements in the task completion capability indicator judgment matrix A to obtain element standardized values; The element standardized value expression is: Among them, r ip ∈[0,1],x ip is the measured value of the pth evaluation object for the i-th evaluation factor in the judgment matrix A, max{x ip } is the maximum value among all evaluation objects, min{x ip } is the minimum value among all evaluation objects; S2412, processing the standardized value of the element to obtain the entropy of the evaluation factor; The entropy H of the i-th evaluation factor i The expression is: in, n is the number of evaluation factors, s is the number of evaluation objects; S2413, processing the entropy of the evaluation factor to obtain a weight vector w a ; The weight vector w a The weight of the i-th evaluation factor is: Among them, oh i ∈[0,1], w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ]。 5. The system resistance effectiveness evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The system resistance effectiveness evaluation matrix E is: E=[w1,w2,w3] Among them, w1 is the weight of the task completion capability index, w2 is the weight of the information processing capability index, w3 is the weight of the collaboration capability index, and w1+w2+w3=1.

6. The system resistance effectiveness evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The weight vector w a The task completion capability index value S1 is obtained by processing the task completion capability index value S1, including: Using the task completion capability evaluation model, the weight vector w a and the task completion capability index membership degree to obtain the task completion capability index evaluation value S1; The task completion capability evaluation model expression is: Among them, w i is the weight vector w a =[ω1,ω2,…,ω n ], the i-th element in u i )x) is the corresponding element in the task completion capability indicator membership.

7. The system resistance effectiveness evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The processing of the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result includes: Using a comprehensive evaluation model, the task completion capability evaluation value S1, the information processing capability evaluation value S2, the coordination capability evaluation value S3 and the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E are processed to obtain a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result; The comprehensive evaluation model is: Among them, w l is the corresponding element in the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation matrix E = [w1, w2, w3], and S is the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

8. A system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device, characterized in that: The device comprises: An evaluation index set construction module is used to construct a system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set; the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set includes a task completion capability index, an information processing capability index, and a coordination capability index; The task completion capability indicators include mobility, data acquisition time, reception and transmission efficiency, data completeness, data loading rate, economy and compatibility; The information processing capability indicators include information acquisition, information processing, information transmission and information utilization; The collaborative capability indicators include support and guarantee capability, high-performance computer processing capability, comprehensive guarantee capability, human-computer integration, and system software interface friendliness; The evaluation module is used to process the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation index set by using the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation model to obtain the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation result.

9. A system confrontation effectiveness evaluation device, characterized in that: The device comprises: A memory storing executable program code; a processor coupled to the memory; The processor calls the executable program code stored in the memory to execute the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer storable medium, characterized in that: The computer storable medium stores computer instructions, and when the computer instructions are called, they are used to execute the system confrontation effectiveness evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images