Autonomous controllable application level evaluation method for special electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of electronic equipment, in particular to an autonomous controllable application level evaluation method for special electronic equipment. The method comprises the following steps: step 1, determining an evaluation factor set; 2, determining a weight set; 3, determining an evaluated membership matrix; 4, performing fuzzy comprehensive evaluation; and 5, evaluating a result. The method comprises the following steps: selecting a plurality of specific indexes such as a basic product autonomous controllable grade, a basic product'risk controllable 'condition, a basic product maturity degree, a basic product application qualification condition and an equipment application condition which reflect characteristics or states of an evaluation object, and collecting and analyzing data of the indexes; and the evaluation object is comprehensively, objectively and accurately evaluated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of electronic equipment, and in particular to a method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of special electronic equipment. Background Art

[0002] In the production process of electronic enterprises, they often need to independently control parts and components, and promote the large-scale application of domestic technologies and basic products. This will accelerate the process of independent control of electronic special equipment and completely solve the problem of the lifeline of the development of electronic equipment of enterprises being controlled by others from the source.

[0003] A large number of domestic basic products such as electronic components, key materials, basic electromechanical products, testing instruments, key software and hardware (hereinafter collectively referred to as basic products) are used in electronic special equipment. Therefore, it is an important task to objectively propose specific evaluation indicators for the autonomous and controllable application level of basic products, provide theoretical support for the comprehensive evaluation of the autonomous and controllable level of electronic special equipment based on various indicators, provide reference for the evaluation of autonomous and controllable technical indicators of electronic special equipment, and guide the selection of components for electronic special equipment to achieve comprehensive autonomous and controllable electronic special equipment. However, the existing analysis and evaluation methods based on individual data cannot conduct a comprehensive and objective evaluation of systematic products. Summary of the invention

[0004] In view of the shortcomings of the existing technology, the present invention provides an evaluation method for the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment. The present invention selects multiple specific indicators that reflect the characteristics or status of the evaluation object, such as the autonomous and controllable level of basic products, the "risk controllability" of basic products, the maturity of basic products, the application qualifications of basic products, and the application of equipment, and collects and analyzes the data of these indicators to conduct a comprehensive, objective, and accurate evaluation of the evaluation object.

[0005] The technical solution of the present invention is: a method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, characterized in that it comprises the following steps:

[0006] Step 1: Determine the evaluation factor set:

[0007] The first-level evaluation factor set U is:

[0008] U = {u1, u2} (1)

[0009] Among them, u1 represents the level of independent and controllable guarantee of basic products, and u2 represents the level of independent and controllable design of equipment; u1 and u2 are the factor sets for the second-level evaluation.

[0010] u1={u11, u12, u13, u14} (2)

[0011] Among them, u11 represents the level of independent controllability of domestic basic products, u12 represents the "risk controllable" status of domestic basic products, u13 represents the maturity level of domestic basic products, and u14 represents the application qualification level of domestic basic products;

[0012] u2={u21, u22, u23, u24} (3)

[0013] Among them, u21 represents the autonomous and controllable design level of the equipment, u22 represents the compliance status of the basic products in the equipment, u23 represents the autonomous and controllable risk control level of the equipment, and u24 represents the application level of the equipment;

[0014] After determining the evaluation index system, establish evaluation standards and scoring rules; select multiple specific indicators of the characteristics or status of the evaluation object, and evaluate the evaluation object by collecting and analyzing data;

[0015] Step 2: Determine the weight set

[0016] a) Establish a first-level factor weight set

[0017] Assume that the evaluation factor u i The weight of is ai (i = 1, 2), then the factor class weight set A is:

[0018] A=(a1,a2) (4)

[0019] a1 represents the weight of the independent and controllable guarantee level of basic products, and a2 represents the weight of the independent and controllable design and application level of equipment;

[0020] b) Establish secondary factor weight set

[0021] u1 and u2 are both 4 evaluation factors, so the factor weight set is:

[0022] A1=(a11,a12,a13,a14)

[0023] A2=(a21,a22,a23,a24)

[0024] Step 3: Determine the membership matrix of the evaluation

[0025] Assume that the evaluation object is evaluated according to the evaluation factor set with n rows and the i-th factor ui, and the membership degree of the j-th element in the corresponding m-th column of the evaluation criteria set is r ij , then the evaluation result of ui is expressed by fuzzy set as:

[0026]

[0027] For n factor sets, the evaluation matrix can be constructed as follows:

[0028]

[0029] R represents the fuzzy relationship between the factor set U and the evaluation set V.

[0030] Step 4: Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation

[0031] The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation is expressed as:

[0032]

[0033] in (j=1,…,m)

[0034] Step 5: Steps to Evaluate Results

[0035] After the evaluation of each project is completed, the evaluation set {excellent, good, medium, poor, bad} is quantified by integrating the evaluation results and represented by 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score v

[0036]

[0037] According to the above-mentioned method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, it is characterized by:

[0038] The comprehensive evaluation v score takes the minimum evaluation value.

[0039] According to the above-mentioned method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of special electronic equipment, it is characterized by: further comprising step 6, determining an evaluation set V:

[0040] V={v1, v2, v3, v4, v5} (9)

[0041] The range corresponding to the minimum evaluation value of the comprehensive evaluation v score is taken as the final evaluation result.

[0042] According to the method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment as described above, it is characterized in that the evaluation criteria include five levels of evaluation grades.

[0043] According to the method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment as described above, it is characterized in that the sum of the product autonomous and controllable guarantee level weight a1 and the equipment autonomous and controllable design application level weight a2 is 1.

[0044] The beneficial effects of the patent of this invention are: a) Principle of objectivity and authenticity: the evaluation work should conform to objective reality, and the qualitative indicator evaluation should be measured under unified standards to truly reflect the effect of promotion and application and ensure the credibility of the evaluation results; b) Principle of systematicity: the evaluation indicator system should be based on the perspective of autonomous and controllable engineering application, and comprehensively and comprehensively reflect the overall situation of the promotion and application of the verification results. Through multi-dimensional indicators, the promotion and application effect of the verification results can be reflected from different aspects; c) Principle of independence: the indicators in the evaluation indicator system should remain independent of each other; d) Principle of emphasis: extract the main factors as evaluation indicators, and the number of indicators for each evaluation project shall not exceed 5; f) Principle of operability: the practicality of the indicator system and the availability and convenience of the required data should be considered to ensure the convenience of evaluation acquisition and the operability of the evaluation work. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0045] The present invention is further described below.

[0046] A method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment of the present invention comprises the following steps:

[0047] Step 1: Determine the evaluation factor set:

[0048] According to the evaluation index system of autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, the evaluation objectives and evaluation factors constitute the first-level evaluation factor set U.

[0049] U = {u1, u2} (10)

[0050] Among them, u1 represents the level of independent controllable guarantee of basic products, and u2 represents the level of independent controllable design of equipment. u1 and u2 are the factor sets for the second-level evaluation.

[0051] u1={u11, u12, u13, u14} (11)

[0052] Among them, u11 represents the level of independent controllability of domestic basic products, u12 represents the "risk controllable" status of domestic basic products, u13 represents the maturity level of domestic basic products, and u14 represents the application qualification level of domestic basic products.

[0053] u2={u21, u22, u23, u24} (12)

[0054] Among them, u21 represents the autonomous and controllable design level of equipment, u22 represents the compliance status of basic products in the equipment, u23 represents the autonomous and controllable risk control level of equipment, and u24 represents the application level of equipment.

[0055] In this step, the factors affecting the level of autonomous and controllable application of electronic special equipment are analyzed, combined with the specific requirements for autonomous and controllable application of electronic special equipment in the stages of project demonstration, engineering development, and finalization of equipment. The autonomous and controllable application process of electronic special equipment is decomposed into two major parts: autonomous and controllable guarantee of basic products and autonomous and controllable design and application of electronic special equipment. These two parts are decomposed into primary and secondary indicators respectively, and then further decomposed into specific evaluation factors. Therefore, the evaluation objectives, primary indicators, secondary indicators and evaluation factors constitute a complete evaluation index system, and the methods of quantitative or qualitative research are listed to determine the level of evaluation factors. This evaluation index system covers the process and results of the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, and is representative and typical. The specific index system is shown in Table 1.

[0056] Table 1 Evaluation index system of autonomous and controllable application level

[0057]

[0058]

[0059] After determining the evaluation index system in this step, establish the evaluation standards and scoring rules. Select multiple specific indicators that can reflect the characteristics or status of the evaluation object, collect and analyze the data of these indicators, conduct a comprehensive, objective and accurate evaluation of the evaluation object, and formulate a complete set of evaluation standards and scoring rules to enable comparison and analysis. Combined with the actual operation in the autonomous and controllable work of electronic special equipment, the evaluation level is divided into five levels. Taking the autonomous and controllable guarantee of basic products as an example, the evaluation factor evaluation standards and scoring rules are shown in Table 2.

[0060] Table 2 Evaluation criteria and scoring rules for evaluation factors

[0061]

[0062]

[0063] Various basic data required for evaluation indicators can be obtained through the indicator system, evaluation standards and scoring details. The objective collection of these basic data ensures the rationality of the evaluation results.

[0064] Step 2: Determine the weight set

[0065] A is a weight assignment, which indicates the importance of each factor in the evaluation set.

[0066] c) Establish a first-level factor class weight set

[0067] Different weights are given according to the degree of influence of the independent controllable guarantee level of basic products and the independent controllable design level of equipment on the independent controllable application of electronic special equipment.i The weight of is ai (i = 1, 2), then the factor class weight set A is:

[0068] A=(a1,a2) (13)

[0069] a1 represents the weight of the independent and controllable guarantee level of basic products, and a2 represents the weight of the independent and controllable design and application level of equipment.

[0070] u1 represents the evaluation factor as the level of independent and controllable guarantee of basic products, and u2 represents the evaluation factor as the level of independent and controllable design and application of equipment.

[0071] a1, a2 and u1, u2 are mutually influential, where a1+a2=1;

[0072] Each evaluation factor is assigned a weight value, which reflects the importance and influence of the factor in the evaluation process. The selection and determination of evaluation factors will directly affect the distribution of weights, and the distribution of weights will in turn affect the accuracy and objectivity of the evaluation results.

[0073] d) Establish a secondary factor weight set

[0074] In each category of factors, each factor is given a corresponding weight according to its importance. Let the weight of the jth scoring item uij in the i-th factor category be aij (i = 1, 2, j = 1, 2, ... n i ), in the present invention, u1 and u2 are both 4 evaluation factors, and the factor weight set is:

[0075] A1=(a11,a12,a13,a14)

[0076] A2=(a21,a22,a23,a24)

[0077] In the present invention, different aij are set for different design and control requirements, so that different parameters can be adjusted according to the design requirements to meet the autonomous design requirements of different controllable requirements, so that the conclusions of the present invention are more in line with various different control requirements.

[0078] a11, a12, a13 and a14, a21, a22, a23 and a24 are the secondary indicator weights;

[0079] a11+a12+a13+a14=a1; a21+a22+a23+a24=a2;

[0080] Step 3: Determine the membership matrix of the evaluation. First, judge from one factor alone to determine the degree of membership of the evaluation object to the scoring criteria, which is called single-factor fuzzy judgment. Suppose the evaluation object is judged according to the evaluation factor set with n rows and the i-th factor ui, and the membership degree of the j-th element in the corresponding m-th column in the evaluation criteria set is r ij , then the evaluation result of ui can be expressed by fuzzy set.

[0081]

[0082] For n factor sets, the evaluation matrix can be constructed as follows:

[0083]

[0084] R represents the fuzzy relationship between the factor set U and the evaluation set V, that is, the reasonable relationship between the influencing factors and the evaluation objects.

[0085] r ij for u i The degree of reasonable membership between the corresponding evaluation sets, which represents the degree of reasonable membership of each factor u i Possibility of making various evaluations.

[0086] Step 4: Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation

[0087] The single factor evaluation matrix shows that the membership reflects the i-th factor u i The jth column of the matrix reflects the degree to which all factors affect the jth evaluation result of the evaluation object. Therefore, the sum of the elements in each column can be used to reflect the comprehensive influence of all factors.

[0088]

[0089] Among them, Cj represents the sum of the elements in each column to reflect the combined impact of all factors.

[0090] However, this does not take into account the importance of each factor. If the various effects in the above formula are multiplied by the corresponding weight a i , (i = 1, 2, ..., n) can more reasonably reflect the comprehensive influence of all factors, so the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation can be expressed as:

[0091]

[0092] in (j=1,…,m)

[0093] The final comprehensive evaluation result can be obtained through multi-level evaluation.

[0094] A method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, further comprising step five: evaluating the results of the step

[0095] After the evaluation of each project is completed, the evaluation set {excellent, good, medium, poor, bad} is quantified by integrating the evaluation results and represented by 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation v

[0096]

[0097] The comprehensive evaluation score takes the minimum evaluation value.

[0098] Step 6: Determine the evaluation set

[0099] The evaluation set is a collection of various possible overall evaluation results that the evaluator may make on the evaluation object, represented by V.

[0100] V={v1,v2,v3,v4,v5}={excellent, good, fair, poor, bad} ................ (19)

[0101] Electronic special equipment manufacturers can use the assessment results to organize targeted analysis of problems in the level of autonomous and controllable applications, formulate improvement measures and implementation plans, and take measures for closed-loop management.

[0102] For a certain equipment, the specific technical indicators are as follows: a certain type of electronic special equipment uses 1,282 domestic electronic components, of which 964 are Class A (independent level), 291 are Class B (control level), 27 are Class C (controllable level), and no Class D and Class E electronic components are used. The proportion of domestic specifications is 95.56%; querying the "Basic Product Risk" list version 1.0, there are 4 basic products with relatively high risks; this type of electronic special equipment is a finalized product and many types of products have been borrowed from similar electronic special equipment.

[0103] An evaluation model is established according to the method of the present invention, and the autonomous and controllable application level is evaluated according to the existing autonomous and controllable level information of this type of electronic special equipment.

[0104] 1.1 Establishing the weight set

[0105] According to the degree of influence of independent and controllable guarantee of basic products and independent and controllable design of equipment on the level of independent and controllable application, the factor class weights and factor class weights are determined. See the specific allocation for details.

[0106] Table 3 Evaluation index weight distribution table

[0107]

[0108] Therefore, the factor class weight set is determined as:

[0109]

[0110] According to the influence of various factors in the basic product independent and controllable guarantee on the level of independent and controllable application, the factor weight set is determined as follows:

[0111]

[0112] According to the influence of various factors in the equipment autonomous and controllable design on the autonomous and controllable application level, the factor class weight set is determined by using the hierarchical analysis method as follows:

[0113]

[0114] 1.2 Single factor evaluation

[0115] With the help of the data on the independent controllability level, maturity level, "risk controllable" type and application qualification in the existing domestic basic product list, combined with the compliance with the published basic product catalog and the query of the "Basic Product Risk" list version 1.0, the corresponding single factor evaluation matrix is ​​obtained as follows:

[0116]

[0117] 1.3 First-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation

[0118] The following evaluates the autonomous and controllable application capabilities of electronic special equipment from the perspectives of autonomous and controllable guarantees of basic products of electronic special equipment and autonomous and controllable design capabilities of equipment.

[0119]

[0120] 1.4 Synthetic fuzzy comprehensive evaluation results

[0121] The autonomous and controllable application capabilities are comprehensively evaluated from two aspects: autonomous and controllable guarantee of basic products and autonomous and controllable design capability of equipment.

[0122]

[0123] 1.5 Processing of evaluation indicators

[0124] After the synthetic fuzzy comprehensive evaluation is completed, the calculation results are substituted into v to obtain the comprehensive evaluation value of the autonomous controllability level of electronic special equipment.

[0125]

[0126] The comparison between the comprehensive evaluation score and the quantitative evaluation set is shown in Table 4.

[0127] Table 4 Comprehensive evaluation score comparison table

[0128]

[0129] Since 4.4 is close to 4, the evaluation result is "good", indicating that the level of autonomous and controllable application of electronic special equipment has reached a good expected goal.

[0130] The present invention establishes systematic evaluation indicators for the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, formulates evaluation standards and scoring rules, constructs an evaluation system for the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, and proposes a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation determination method and comprehensive evaluation model based on weight coefficients, which can guide the autonomous and controllable design of electronic special equipment in a targeted manner. Through case application analysis, the operability and application effect of the method are demonstrated.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment, characterized by: The following steps are involved: Step 1: Determine the evaluation factor set: The first-level evaluation factor set U is: U = {u1, u2} (1) Among them, u1 represents the level of independent and controllable guarantee of basic products, and u2 represents the level of independent and controllable design of equipment; u1 and u2 are the factor sets for the second-level evaluation. u1={u11, u12, u13, u14} (2) Among them, u11 represents the level of independent controllability of domestic basic products, u12 represents the "risk controllable" status of domestic basic products, u13 represents the maturity level of domestic basic products, and u14 represents the application qualification level of domestic basic products; u2={u21, u22, u23, u24} (3) Among them, u21 represents the autonomous and controllable design level of the equipment, u22 represents the compliance status of the basic products in the equipment, u23 represents the autonomous and controllable risk control level of the equipment, and u24 represents the application level of the equipment; After determining the evaluation index system, establish evaluation standards and scoring rules; select multiple specific indicators of the characteristics or status of the evaluation object, and evaluate the evaluation object by collecting and analyzing data; Step 2: Determine the weight set a) Establish a first-level factor weight set Assume that the evaluation factor u i The weight of is ai (i = 1, 2), then the factor class weight set A is: A=(a1,a2) (4) a1 represents the weight of the independent and controllable guarantee level of basic products, and a2 represents the weight of the independent and controllable design and application level of equipment; b) Establish secondary factor weight set u1 and u2 are both 4 evaluation factors, so the factor weight set is: A1=(a11,a12,a13,a14) A2=(a21,a22,a23,a24) Step 3: Determine the membership matrix of the evaluation Assume that the evaluation object is evaluated according to the evaluation factor set with n rows and the i-th factor ui, and the membership degree of the j-th element in the corresponding m-th column of the evaluation criteria set is r ij , then the evaluation result of ui is expressed by fuzzy set as: For n factor sets, the evaluation matrix can be constructed as follows: R represents the fuzzy relationship between the factor set U and the evaluation set V. Step 4: Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation is expressed as: in Step 5: Steps to Evaluate Results After the evaluation of each project is completed, the evaluation set {excellent, good, medium, poor, bad} is quantified by integrating the evaluation results and represented by 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 to calculate the comprehensive evaluation score v 2. According to claim 1, a method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment is characterized by: The comprehensive evaluation v score takes the minimum evaluation value.

3. The method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment according to claim 1 is characterized by: It also includes step 6, determining the evaluation set V: V={v1, v2, v3, v4, v5} (9) The range corresponding to the minimum evaluation value of the comprehensive evaluation v score is taken as the final evaluation result.

4. The method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The evaluation criteria include a five-level evaluation rating scale.

5. The method for evaluating the autonomous and controllable application level of electronic special equipment according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The sum of the product's autonomous and controllable assurance level weight a1 and the equipment's autonomous and controllable design and application level weight a2 is 1.

Images