Evaluation index construction method for space blue army simulation system

Abstract

The invention relates to a space blue army simulation system evaluation index construction method. The method comprises the following steps: S1, designing an efficiency evaluation index quantitative editing template; s2, analyzing internal mapping logic of the space blue army simulation system; s3, constructing a specific evaluation index resource library; s4, designing a calculation method of a specific evaluation index; s5, making an evaluation plan; step S6, generating an index architecture; step S7, designing an efficiency evaluation index; step S8, designing execution evaluation indexes; step S9, designing risk item indexes, and analyzing risks; and step S10, the evaluation index levels are distributed. According to the method, the effect-based blue army combat evaluation indexes can be quickly constructed, on one hand, the blue army evaluation method theory integrated with the command process is followed, on the other hand, the reuse rate of artificial information filling of a simulation system is increased, and the operation process is simplified.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of system indicator construction, and in particular to a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system. Background Art

[0002] The Space Blue Force Simulation System is designed to meet the challenges of future high-tech combat equipment, complex combat operations and uncertain battlefield environments. By building a networked, systematic and intelligent environment, it conducts research on space blue force operations and provides an imaginary enemy for system confrontation simulation training. The core of the Space Blue Force Simulation System is to simulate all elements of blue force operations, thereby providing commanders and staff with a training environment close to actual combat, ensuring the pertinence and effectiveness of training, and improving decision-making capabilities and combat efficiency.

[0003] As an important part of combat simulation, combat assessment should provide real-time feedback and evaluation to help commanders understand the effects of combat operations and dynamically revise prediction results based on real-time data. This method focuses on the construction of combat assessment indicators from the perspective of the US military. On the one hand, the blue army combat simulation represented by the US military is the implementation method usually adopted by mainstream research; on the other hand, the blue army combat regulations or actual exercise and training processes are used as input, which can improve the realism of the blue army simulation to a certain extent. The US military combat assessment theory and related materials can provide a reference for the design of the method.

[0004] According to public information, the U.S. military defines combat assessment as "a set of continuous processes based on combat and assessment practices that can support commanders' decision-making activities by measuring whether combat operations are moving towards completing tasks, creating certain conditions required for operations, or achieving combat objectives." In order to guide combat assessment tasks and enhance the awareness of U.S. military officers and soldiers on current combat assessment practices and norms, the U.S. military has successively released some regulations and manuals to explain assessment techniques and procedures, provide a basic assessment framework, and conceptually provide an overall operating procedure for integrating assessment activities with other command and control activities, including the classification and design process of assessment indicators. However, the U.S. military's combat assessment is mainly carried out around combat operations, and commanders, staff, assessment teams and other relevant parties jointly participate in completing assessment activities including assessment plans. Too many complex command organizations and participants are involved. Highly realistic mirroring to the simulation system means a large investment in seats and operators. Building an assessment system according to this framework directly leads to a steep rise in the learning curve of the simulation system, and the complexity of the operation and use of the simulation system has increased dramatically.

[0005] In addition, in terms of constructing evaluation indicators, the US military tends to adopt engineering thinking to fully grasp the quantitative and logical relationship between actions and the environment, and between actions. From the perspective of system theory, the US military's vision of building its combat evaluation theory system is to comprehensively and comprehensively form quantitative evaluation conclusions. The latest US military combat evaluation theory divides evaluation indicators into execution evaluation indicators and effectiveness evaluation indicators that represent direct and indirect effects. Compared with the real-world combat evaluation, the US military combat evaluation and analysis with the help of simulation systems first constructs the indicator system based on the evaluation process and indicator model framework, and then selects and matches the data source for indicator calculation. The main difference is that the combat data in the simulation system comes from deduction and simulation. With the help of evaluation and analysis data, the commander determines the combat plan and issues relevant combat instructions, starts the simulation system deduction, and calculates various indicators again according to the simulation deduction results to evaluate the combat effect and the achievement of combat objectives, as well as analyze the gap with the rehearsal results and expected effects. Therefore, the process needs to obtain the operational plans and schemes designed and generated by the command organization, understand the threats in the operational environment, the occurrence area, the equipment and capabilities of the threatening party, analyze the measurability of the purpose and effect of the action, and supplement the detailed elements supporting the measurement in a targeted manner, and design the effectiveness evaluation index (MOE), execution evaluation index (MOP), and specific evaluation indicators accordingly. In addition, when commanders conduct operational analysis and decision-making, they need to comprehensively consider factors such as changes in the operational environment and combat force losses, which can be used as supplementary evaluation indicators for analysis and calculation.

[0006] Therefore, designing a method to construct evaluation indicators for the space blue force simulation system is an urgent problem to be solved. Summary of the invention

[0007] In order to solve the technical problems existing in the above-mentioned prior art, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a method for constructing evaluation indicators of a space blue force simulation system, which can quickly construct effect-based blue force combat evaluation indicators. On the one hand, it follows the theory of the blue force evaluation method integrated into the command process, and on the other hand, it improves the reuse rate of manually reported information in the simulation system and simplifies the operation process.

[0008] To achieve the above-mentioned purpose of the invention, the present invention provides a method for constructing evaluation indicators of a space blue force simulation system, comprising the following steps:

[0009] Step S1, designing a quantitative editing template for performance evaluation indicators;

[0010] Step S2, analyzing the internal mapping logic of the space blue force simulation system;

[0011] Step S3, constructing a specific evaluation indicator resource library;

[0012] Step S4, designing a calculation method for specific evaluation indicators;

[0013] Step S5: formulating an evaluation plan;

[0014] Step S6: Generate an indicator framework;

[0015] Step S7, designing performance evaluation indicators;

[0016] Step S8, designing execution evaluation indicators;

[0017] Step S9: Design risk item indicators and analyze risks;

[0018] Step S10: Allocate evaluation index levels.

[0019] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S1, multiple design elements are selected to form a quantitative template for effectiveness evaluation indicators, and the data type and data representation form of each design element are agreed upon, which is reused with the expected effect of the combat plan;

[0020] The design elements include at least time, area, relevant parties and status.

[0021] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S2, the simulated task type, action type, and the subordination relationship of combat equipment are obtained from the combat process of the simulation system.

[0022] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S3, the combat mission and equipment capabilities of interest are selected, and the evaluation knowledge reserve is used to select elements that characterize the mission equipment type's mission status and results to construct evaluation indicators, and the elements are included in the specific evaluation indicator resource library;

[0023] In the step S4, a corresponding indicator calculation method is designed for the specific evaluation indicator constructed in step S3, including statistical rules for indicator calculation input data based on simulation output data, qualitative evaluation rules and logical judgment.

[0024] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S5, the input element content of the evaluation plan is obtained according to the execution process of the blue force combat action and the output information type of the simulation system, which specifically includes:

[0025] The simulation system obtains the information or documents of the blue army's combat plan and determines the execution process of the blue army's combat operations;

[0026] Analyze the action intention, action order, and action plan based on the blue force combat action execution process, obtain the input elements of the evaluation plan, and formulate the evaluation plan;

[0027] The content of obtaining the input elements of the assessment plan specifically includes: obtaining the purpose of the combat operation, the strength of the combat parties, the blue army command system and the equipment command and control relationship from the action intention; obtaining the expected effects of each stage of the combat mission, the execution unit, the key combat objectives, the list of key strike targets based on the combat objectives, and the action risks from the action order; obtaining the action execution subject, related equipment and objectives, and the action content from the action plan.

[0028] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S6, a combat assessment indicator framework is designed based on the blue army combat assessment theory, and combat objectives and quantitative descriptions of action effects and risk cost information are extracted based on the assessment plan element content extracted in step S5 to fill in the content of the indicator framework.

[0029] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S7, according to the expected effects of each stage extracted in step S5, corresponding to the execution subject, related equipment and target in the action plan, a list of equipment types is obtained;

[0030] The required indicator items are selected from the specific evaluation indicator resources constructed according to step S3, and the indicator calculation method is adjusted based on step S4. The indicator calculation method at least includes the time and space constraints of statistical rules, the threshold range of qualitative evaluation rules, and the timing of logical judgment.

[0031] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S8, each plan in the evaluation plan is taken as an evaluation task object, and whether the corresponding plan is successfully executed is created as an execution evaluation indicator.

[0032] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S9, the corresponding action risk in each action plan extracted in step S5 is taken as a risk item, a risk item indicator is created, and the risk is analyzed.

[0033] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S10, when it is necessary to generate a multi-level evaluation report based on the blue army command system and equipment command and control relationship obtained in step S5, the combat operation objective of the lower layer is taken as an action effect of the upper layer, and steps S6 to S9 are repeated.

[0034] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0035] The present invention proposes a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system. By establishing a quantitative matching relationship between the contents of a blue force system task order or plan order and the mapping of the command system, process and equipment, an evaluation plan is automatically generated by matching. This method can support space blue force simulation system users to construct a process based on simulation system evaluation indicators, and utilize performance evaluation indicators and execution evaluation indicator design templates and specific evaluation indicator resources to quickly construct a combat evaluation indicator system. On the one hand, it complies with the theory of the blue force evaluation method integrated into the command process, and on the other hand, it improves the reuse rate of manually reported information in the simulation system and simplifies the operating process.

[0036] Furthermore, the present invention can construct mapping logic and combat effect rule quantification templates within the simulation system, so that the combat command system, combat and evaluation process of the space blue force simulation system used for system-level combat research and training analysis are closer to the actual blue force combat evaluation, and can also solve the problems of limited operating seats and difficulty in fully allocating professional personnel. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0037] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments are briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention, and for ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0038] Figure 1 The overall flow chart of the method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue force simulation system according to one embodiment of the present invention is schematically shown;

[0039] Figure 2 The indicator architecture of step S6 according to one embodiment of the present invention is schematically shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0040] The description of the embodiments of this specification should be combined with the corresponding drawings, which should be considered as part of the complete specification. In the drawings, the shape or thickness of the embodiments may be enlarged and indicated for simplification or convenience. Furthermore, the parts of each structure in the drawings will be described separately. It is worth noting that the elements not shown in the drawings or not described in words are in a form known to ordinary technicians in the relevant technical field.

[0041] The description of the embodiments herein and any reference to directions and orientations are only for the convenience of description and are not to be construed as any limitation on the scope of protection of the present invention. The following description of the preferred embodiments may involve combinations of features, which may exist independently or in combination, and the present invention is not particularly limited to the preferred embodiments. The scope of the present invention is defined by the claims.

[0042] like Figure 1 As shown, a method for constructing evaluation indicators of a space blue force simulation system of the present invention comprises the following steps:

[0043] Step S1, designing a quantitative editing template for effectiveness evaluation indicators, selecting multiple design elements to form a quantitative template for effectiveness evaluation indicators, agreeing on the data type and data representation form of each design element, and reusing it with the expected effect of the combat plan;

[0044] The design elements include at least time, area, relevant parties, and status;

[0045] Construct a basic effectiveness evaluation index design template for representing combat effectiveness, and preliminarily design a template composed of time, region, quantity, status, related parties and other elements. Time includes time point, time period, duration and other types, region is represented by region code, quantity includes value and unit, status includes all types of adjudication results of the simulation system, and related parties include the camp and force type information of the adjudication effect party; the expected combat effect and action risk in the agreed simulation system are input in the form of this template, and finally form a quantitative editing template for effectiveness evaluation indicators.

[0046] Step S2: Analyze the internal mapping logic of the space blue force simulation system, and obtain the simulated task type, action type, and the subordinate relationship of combat equipment from the combat process of the simulation system;

[0047] Construct a mapping relationship between the simulation system's combat process and the evaluation process, including obtaining a list of combat action types corresponding to the blue army's combat mission types in the simulation system, creating an association between the blue army's action types and combat equipment, and recording them in an association table to form a mapping logic relationship index file.

[0048] Step S3: construct a specific evaluation indicator resource library, select the combat missions and equipment capabilities of interest, use the evaluation knowledge reserve, select the elements that characterize the mission equipment type's mission status and results to construct evaluation indicators, and include them in the specific evaluation indicator resource library;

[0049] For example, the blue army represented by the US military is used as the simulation object. According to the US military's JP3-14 space combat regulations, according to the classification of space combat and related capabilities, the task areas of concern to the space blue army simulation system, such as intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance tasks, are selected. Using common sense in this field, specific evaluation indicators are created for combat equipment in the corresponding task areas. For example, the main equipment of concern in intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance tasks is various types of space-based reconnaissance equipment. As common sense in this field, reconnaissance equipment generally selects indicators such as reconnaissance results, detection results, and the number of discoveries / identifications, and the resource information shared by existing simulation systems can be reused.

[0050] Step S4, designing a calculation method for specific evaluation indicators, designing a corresponding indicator calculation method for the specific evaluation indicators constructed in step S3, including indicator calculation input data statistical rules, qualitative evaluation rules and logical judgment based on simulation output data;

[0051] Taking the indicators enumerated in step S3 as an example, the indicator calculation method is designed one by one. The reconnaissance result indicator is to sort out the data in the reconnaissance situation and the assumption database, and output the reconnaissance results, discovery (identification) time period, and positioning accuracy of each reconnaissance satellite for each target; the detection result indicator is to sort out the data in the detection event and the assumption database, and output the positioning accuracy and identification probability of the satellite for the target per second; the discovery number indicator is the first selected reconnaissance target, and the output is processed in two cases. One is to assign a default value of 0 to the target that is not in the statistical deduction situation, and the other is to select the target that is in the statistical deduction situation. The result of subtracting the two adjacent record times (target discovery time) of the target is greater than 5s (one imaging time), and the discovery number F is increased by 1; the identification number statistics are the same as the discovery number, and the records with the reconnaissance result of "identification" are filtered out (that is, "discovery" is filtered out).

[0052] The calculation method of specific evaluation indicators needs to comprehensively consider many factors such as the simulation system architecture, simulation modeling granularity, deduction and guidance timing, and combat command operations, and should be designed and coded according to the actual data interaction situation of the model system.

[0053] Step S5: Formulate an assessment plan, and obtain the input elements of the assessment plan according to the execution process of the blue force combat operation and the output information type of the simulation system, including:

[0054] The simulation system obtains the information or documents of the blue army's combat plan and determines the execution process of the blue army's combat operations;

[0055] Analyze the action intention, action order, and action plan based on the blue force combat action execution process, obtain the input elements of the evaluation plan, and formulate the evaluation plan;

[0056] The content of obtaining the input elements of the assessment plan specifically includes: obtaining the purpose of the combat operation, the strength of the combat parties, the blue army command system and the equipment command and control relationship from the action intention; obtaining the expected effects of each stage of the combat mission, the execution unit, the key combat objectives, the list of key strike targets based on the combat objectives, and the action risks from the action order; obtaining the action execution subject, related equipment and objectives, and the action content from the action plan.

[0057] Before inputting the blue army combat plan information or documents into the simulation system, the blue army combat plan information or documents can be converted into a file type that the simulation system can recognize and easily process, and then the blue army combat action execution process can be obtained based on the blue army combat plan information or documents.

[0058] Step S6, generating an indicator framework, designing an operational assessment indicator framework according to the blue army operational assessment theory, extracting operational objectives and quantitatively described action effects and risk cost information according to the evaluation plan element content extracted in step S5, and filling in the content of the indicator framework;

[0059] Create an indicator system with the action goal as the root node. The action effect includes two types of indicators: the effectiveness evaluation indicators of the own capabilities (red team capabilities) and the opponent's capabilities (blue team capabilities), and the execution evaluation indicators of the specific task execution. The capability indicators of the opposing sides are determined by the combat forces of the combat parties at the time of evaluation. The specific task execution evaluation indicators are determined by the matching of the action execution results in the action plan and the judgment results. The risk cost includes environmental changes and force losses, which can be directly obtained by step S5. The indicator structure is shown in the attached figure. Figure 2 shown.

[0060] Step S7, designing performance evaluation indicators, and obtaining a list of equipment types according to the expected effects of each stage extracted in step S5 corresponding to the execution subjects, related equipment and targets in the action plan;

[0061] Selecting required indicator items from the specific evaluation indicator resources constructed according to step S3, and adjusting the indicator calculation method based on step S4, wherein the indicator calculation method at least includes time and space constraints of statistical rules, threshold ranges of qualitative evaluation rules, and timing of logical judgments;

[0062] Taking an expected effect of one's own capability (such as conducting reconnaissance on a target no less than 5 times within 1 day) as an example, we design performance evaluation indicators.

[0063] First, the quantity "1 day" "5 times", the status "reconnaissance" and the related party "certain target" in the effect are used as input constraints for calculating the effectiveness index;

[0064] Next, according to common sense in the field, the “reconnaissance” status statistics generally use the discovery and identification times indicators, and the reconnaissance results, detection results, and discovery / identification times indicators can be selected from the specific evaluation indicator set of the reconnaissance equipment according to the mapping logic relationship index;

[0065] Then adjust the indicator calculation method according to the simulation time. When the simulation time is greater than 1 day, select the statistical time start and end interval; when the simulation time is less than 1 day, the number of discoveries in 1 day = the number of discoveries F / simulation time*24 hours, and the number of recognitions in 1 day = the number of recognitions F / simulation time*24 hours.

[0066] Step S8: Design execution evaluation indicators, take each plan in the evaluation scheme as an evaluation task object, and create an execution evaluation indicator based on whether the corresponding plan is successfully executed;

[0067] Traverse all combat plan items in the evaluation plan and generate an indicator node for each plan. To automatically calculate the evaluation indicators, it is necessary to build the association between the simulation system action results and the combat actions. First, select the combat action (plan), obtain the action command in the combat action, match the decision output according to the time, related equipment and target of the action command, establish and record the association between the decision result and the action command in the time window, traverse each action command in the action plan in time sequence, and record the association relationship that is successfully matched.

[0068] Step S9, design risk item indicators, analyze risks, take each action plan corresponding to the action risk extracted in step S5 as a risk item, create risk item indicators, analyze risks, and classify or directly list them according to actual conditions;

[0069] The calculation and judgment of the indicators can be achieved by obtaining the output of the execution entity, related equipment and target matching in the action plan. The statistical environmental change judgment result is recorded as environmental change, and the statistical troop loss judgment result is recorded as troop loss.

[0070] Step S10, assigning the evaluation index levels. When it is necessary to generate a multi-level evaluation report based on the blue army command system and equipment command and control relationship obtained in step S5, the combat operation objectives of the lower layer are taken as an action effect of the upper layer, and steps S6 to S9 are repeated.

[0071] If there is no need to output evaluation and analysis separately by command node, the currently created indicator system can be directly stored; if a certain command node needs to be analyzed separately, it is necessary to analyze and obtain the combat plan content related to the command node, and extract the combat purpose of the node as the root node.

[0072] A method for constructing evaluation indicators of a space blue army simulation system of the present invention comprises the following steps: step S1, designing a quantitative editing template for performance evaluation indicators; step S2, analyzing the internal mapping logic of the space blue army simulation system; step S3, constructing a specific evaluation indicator resource library; step S4, designing a calculation method for specific evaluation indicators; step S5, formulating an evaluation plan; step S6, generating an indicator architecture; step S7, designing performance evaluation indicators; step S8, designing execution evaluation indicators; step S9, designing risk item indicators and analyzing risks; step S10, allocating evaluation indicator levels. The present invention can transform the conceptual flow of the US military evaluation theory into an application flow that is easy to operate for the simulation system based on the US military JDN1-15 order annotation file and the various military tactics, technical and procedure manuals "Operational Evaluation", and provide a method for constructing operational evaluation indicators that is close to the US military evaluation theory, which can restore the logic and focus of the US military evaluation to a certain extent, and simplify the application complexity of the blue army simulation system, and provide a solution for constructing the operational evaluation function of the space blue army simulation system.

[0073] It should also be noted that, in this article, the terms "include", "comprises" or any other variants thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that a process, method, article or terminal device including a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also includes other elements not explicitly listed, or also includes elements inherent to such process, method, article or terminal device. In the absence of further restrictions, the elements defined by the sentence "comprises a ..." do not exclude the existence of other identical elements in the process, method, article or terminal device including the elements.

[0074] Finally, it should be noted that the above is a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that although the preferred embodiment of the present invention has been described, for those skilled in the art, once the basic creative concept of the present invention is known, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principles of the present invention, and these improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the attached claims are intended to be interpreted as including the preferred embodiment and all changes and modifications that fall within the scope of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: Step S1, designing a quantitative editing template for performance evaluation indicators; Step S2, analyzing the internal mapping logic of the space blue force simulation system; Step S3, constructing a specific evaluation indicator resource library; Step S4, designing a calculation method for specific evaluation indicators; Step S5: formulating an evaluation plan; Step S6: Generate an indicator framework; Step S7, designing performance evaluation indicators; Step S8, designing execution evaluation indicators; Step S9: Design risk item indicators and analyze risks; Step S10: Allocate evaluation index levels.

2. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step S1, multiple design elements are selected to form a quantitative template for effectiveness evaluation indicators, and the data type and data representation form of each design element are agreed upon, which is reused with the expected effect of the combat plan; The design elements include at least time, area, relevant parties and status.

3. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 2, characterized in that: In step S2, the simulated mission type, action type, and the subordinate relationship of combat equipment are obtained from the combat process of the simulation system.

4. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 3 is characterized in that: In step S3, the combat mission and equipment capabilities of interest are selected, and the evaluation knowledge reserve is used to select elements that characterize the mission equipment type's mission status and results to construct evaluation indicators, and the elements are included in the specific evaluation indicator resource library; In the step S4, a corresponding indicator calculation method is designed for the specific evaluation indicator constructed in step S3, including statistical rules for indicator calculation input data based on simulation output data, qualitative evaluation rules and logical judgment.

5. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 2 is characterized in that: In step S5, the input elements of the evaluation plan are obtained according to the execution process of the blue force combat operation and the type of information output by the simulation system, which specifically includes: The simulation system obtains the information or documents of the blue army's combat plan and determines the execution process of the blue army's combat operations; Analyze the action intention, action order, and action plan based on the blue force combat action execution process, obtain the input elements of the evaluation plan, and formulate the evaluation plan; The content of obtaining the input elements of the assessment plan specifically includes: obtaining the purpose of the combat operation, the strength of the combat parties, the blue army command system and the equipment command and control relationship from the action intention; obtaining the expected effects of each stage of the combat mission, the execution unit, the key combat objectives, the list of key strike targets based on the combat objectives, and the action risks from the action order; obtaining the action execution subject, related equipment and objectives, and the action content from the action plan.

6. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 5 is characterized in that: In step S6, a combat assessment indicator framework is designed based on the blue force combat assessment theory, and combat objectives and quantitative descriptions of action effects and risk cost information are extracted based on the assessment plan element content extracted in step S5 to fill in the content of the indicator framework.

7. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 6 is characterized in that: In step S7, according to the expected effects of each stage extracted in step S5, corresponding to the execution subject, related equipment and target in the action plan, a list of equipment types is obtained; The required indicator items are selected from the specific evaluation indicator resources constructed according to step S3, and the indicator calculation method is adjusted based on step S4. The indicator calculation method at least includes the time and space constraints of statistical rules, the threshold range of qualitative evaluation rules, and the timing of logical judgment.

8. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 7, characterized in that: In step S8, each plan in the evaluation scheme is taken as an evaluation task object, and whether the corresponding plan is successfully executed is created as an execution evaluation indicator.

9. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 5, characterized in that: In step S9, each action plan corresponding to the action risk extracted in step S5 is taken as a risk item, a risk item indicator is created, and the risk is analyzed.

10. The method for constructing evaluation indicators of the space blue army simulation system according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step S10, when it is necessary to generate a multi-level evaluation report based on the blue force command system and equipment command and control relationship obtained in step S5, the combat operation objective of the lower layer is taken as an action effect of the upper layer, and steps S6 to S9 are repeated.

Images