Methodology for Constructing Evaluation Indicators for Space Blue Force Simulation System

Abstract

This invention relates to a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system, comprising: step S1, designing a quantitative editing template for effectiveness evaluation indicators; step S2, analyzing the internal mapping logic of the space blue force simulation system; step S3, constructing a resource library of specific evaluation indicators; step S4, designing calculation methods for specific evaluation indicators; step S5, formulating an evaluation plan; step S6, generating an indicator architecture; step S7, designing effectiveness evaluation indicators; step S8, designing execution evaluation indicators; step S9, designing risk item indicators and analyzing risks; and step S10, allocating evaluation indicator levels. This invention can quickly construct effect-based blue force combat evaluation indicators, adhering to the theory of blue force evaluation methods integrated into command processes, and improving the reusability of manually entered information in the simulation system while simplifying the operation process.

Description

Technical Field

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

[0002] The Space Blue Force Simulation System is designed to address the challenges of future high-tech combat equipment, complex combat operations, and uncertain battlefield environments. By constructing a networked, systematic, and intelligent environment, it conducts research on space blue force operations, providing a hypothetical adversary for system-on-systems confrontation simulation training. The core of the Space Blue Force Simulation System lies in simulating all elements of blue force operations, thereby providing commanders and staff with a near-real combat training environment, ensuring the relevance and effectiveness of training, and improving decision-making capabilities and operational efficiency.

[0003] As an important part of combat simulation, operational assessment should provide real-time feedback and evaluation to help commanders understand the effectiveness of combat operations and dynamically revise predictions based on real-time data.

[0004] Combat assessment and analysis using simulation systems differs from real-world combat assessment in that both begin by constructing an indicator system based on an assessment process and indicator model framework, followed by selecting and matching data sources for indicator calculation. The key difference lies in the source of combat data in simulation systems: the data originates from deduction and simulation. Using the assessment and analysis data, commanders determine combat plans and issue relevant combat orders, initiating simulation exercises. Based on the simulation results, various indicators are recalculated to assess combat effectiveness and the achievement of combat objectives, as well as analyzing the gap between the simulation results and expected outcomes. Therefore, this process requires access to the combat plans and schemes designed and generated by the command structure, understanding the threats in the combat environment, the areas of occurrence, and the equipment and capabilities of the perpetrators. It also requires analyzing the measurability of the action's objectives and effects, supplementing the measurement with detailed supporting elements, and designing effectiveness assessment indicators, execution assessment indicators, and specific assessment indicators accordingly. Furthermore, commanders conducting combat analysis and decision-making need to comprehensively consider factors such as changes in the combat environment and troop losses, which can be used as supplementary assessment indicators for analysis and calculation.

[0005] Therefore, designing a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system is an urgent problem to be solved. Summary of the Invention

[0006] To address the technical problems existing in the prior art, the present invention aims to provide a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system. This method can quickly construct effect-based blue force combat evaluation indicators, which on the one hand follows the theory of blue force evaluation methods integrated into the command process, and on the other hand improves the reuse rate of manually entered information in the simulation system and simplifies the operation process.

[0007] To achieve the above-mentioned objectives, this invention provides a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system, comprising the following steps:

[0008] Step S1: Design a template for quantifying performance evaluation indicators;

[0009] Step S2: Analyze the internal mapping logic of the Space Blue Team simulation system;

[0010] Step S3: Construct a resource library of specific evaluation indicators;

[0011] Step S4: Design the calculation method for specific evaluation indicators;

[0012] Step S5: Develop an evaluation plan;

[0013] Step S6: Generate the indicator framework;

[0014] Step S7: Design performance evaluation indicators;

[0015] Step S8: Design and implement evaluation indicators;

[0016] Step S9: Design risk indicators and analyze risks;

[0017] Step S10: Assign levels of evaluation indicators.

[0018] According to one 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 and reused with the expected effect of the combat plan.

[0019] The design elements include at least time, region, stakeholders, and status.

[0020] According to one technical solution of the present invention, in step S2, the simulated mission type, action type, and subordinate relationship of combat equipment are obtained from the combat process of the simulation system.

[0021] According to one technical solution of the present invention, in step S3, the combat missions and equipment capabilities of interest are selected, and evaluation indicators are constructed by using the knowledge reserve of evaluation to select elements that characterize the mission equipment type to achieve the mission status and results, and are included in the specific evaluation indicator resource library.

[0022] In step S4, a corresponding index calculation method is designed for the specific evaluation index constructed in step S3, including statistical rules for input data of index calculation based on simulation output data, qualitative evaluation rules, and logical judgment.

[0023] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S5, the evaluation plan input elements are obtained based on the Blue Force's operational execution process and the simulation system's output information type, specifically including:

[0024] The simulation system acquires information or documents about the opposing force's combat plans and determines the execution process of the opposing force's combat operations.

[0025] Based on the Blue Force's operational execution process, analyze the operational intent, orders, and plans to obtain the input elements for the evaluation plan and formulate the evaluation plan.

[0026] The specific input elements for the assessment plan include: obtaining the operational objectives, forces of all parties involved in the operation, the Blue Force's command structure and equipment command and control relationships from the operational intent; obtaining the expected effects of each stage of the operational mission, the execution units, key operational targets, a list of key targets for strike based on the operational objectives, and operational risks from the operational orders; and obtaining the operational execution entities, related equipment and targets, and operational content from the operational plan.

[0027] According to one technical solution of the present invention, in step S6, based on the Blue Force Operation Evaluation Theory, an operation evaluation index framework is designed, and the operation objectives and quantitatively described action effects and risk cost information are extracted from the evaluation plan elements extracted in step S5 and filled into the index framework.

[0028] According to a technical solution of the present invention, in step S7, an equipment type list is obtained based on the execution subject, associated equipment and target in the action plan corresponding to the expected effects of each stage extracted in step S5;

[0029] Select the required indicator items from the specific evaluation indicator resources constructed according to step S3, and adjust the indicator calculation method based on step S4. The indicator calculation method includes at least the time and space constraints of statistical rules, the threshold range of qualitative evaluation rules, and the timing of logical judgments.

[0030] According to one technical solution of the present invention, 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 index.

[0031] According to one technical solution of the present invention, in step S9, the action risk corresponding to each action plan extracted in step S5 is taken as a risk item, risk item indicators are created, and risks are analyzed.

[0032] According to one technical solution of the present invention, 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 action objective of the lower level is taken as an action effect of the upper level, and steps S6 to S9 are repeated.

[0033] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following advantages:

[0034] This invention proposes a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system. By establishing a quantitative matching relationship between the content of the blue force system's task sheet or plan and the command system, processes, and equipment, an evaluation plan is automatically generated. This method enables users of the space blue force simulation system to quickly construct an operational evaluation indicator system based on the simulation system's evaluation indicator construction process, utilizing performance evaluation indicators, execution evaluation indicator design templates, and specific evaluation indicator resources. On the one hand, it follows the theory of blue force evaluation methods integrated into the command process; on the other hand, it improves the reusability of manually entered information in the simulation system and simplifies the operation process.

[0035] Furthermore, this invention can construct mapping logic and quantification templates for combat effect rules within the simulation system, making the combat command system, combat and evaluation process of the space blue force simulation system used for system-level combat research and training analysis closer to the actual blue force combat evaluation. It can also solve the problems of limited operating positions and difficulty in allocating sufficient professional personnel. Attached Figure Description

[0036] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the embodiments will be briefly described below. Obviously, the drawings described below are merely some embodiments of the present invention, and those skilled in the art can obtain other drawings based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0037] Figure 1 This diagram illustrates the overall flowchart of a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue team simulation system according to one embodiment of the present invention.

[0038] Figure 2 The illustration shows the index structure of step S6 according to one embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0039] The description of the embodiments in this specification should be taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, which should form part of the complete specification. In the drawings, the shape or thickness of the embodiments may be exaggerated and may be indicated in a simplified or convenient manner. Furthermore, parts of the various structures in the drawings will be described separately; it is worth noting that elements not shown in the figures or not described in words are in a form known to those skilled in the art.

[0040] The descriptions of the embodiments herein, including any references to directions and orientations, are for ease of description only and should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention. The following description of preferred embodiments involves combinations of features, which may exist independently or in combination; the invention is not particularly limited to the preferred embodiments. The scope of the invention is defined by the claims.

[0041] like Figure 1 As shown, the present invention provides a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system, comprising the following steps:

[0042] Step S1: Design a quantitative editing template for performance evaluation indicators. Select multiple design elements to form a quantitative template for performance evaluation indicators, and agree on the data type and data representation format of each design element so that it can be reused with the expected effect of the combat plan.

[0043] The design elements include at least time, region, stakeholders, and status;

[0044] A template for designing effectiveness assessment indicators to represent operational effectiveness is constructed. This template can be initially designed by combining elements such as time, region, quantity, status, and stakeholders. Time includes types such as time points, time periods, and durations; region is represented by region codes; quantity includes numerical values ​​and units; status includes all types of adjudication results from the simulation system; and stakeholders include the faction and troop type information of the party affected by the adjudication effect. It is agreed that the expected operational effects and operational risks in the simulation system will be input using this template, ultimately forming a quantitative editing template for effectiveness assessment indicators.

[0045] Step S2: Analyze the internal mapping logic of the space blue force simulation system and obtain the simulated mission type, action type, and subordinate relationship of combat equipment from the combat process of the simulation system.

[0046] Construct a mapping relationship between the simulation system's combat process and the evaluation process. This includes obtaining a list of combat action types corresponding to the Blue Force's combat mission types in the simulation system, creating an association relationship between the Blue Force's action types and combat equipment, recording this information in an association table, and forming a mapping logic relationship index file.

[0047] Step S3: Construct a specific evaluation indicator resource library, select the combat missions and equipment capabilities of interest, utilize the evaluation knowledge reserve, select elements that characterize the mission and equipment types to achieve the mission status and results, construct evaluation indicators, and incorporate them into the specific evaluation indicator resource library.

[0048] Based on the classification of space operations and related capabilities, the space blue force simulation system selects mission domains of interest, such as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions. Utilizing common knowledge in this field, specific evaluation indicators are created for the combat equipment in these mission domains. For example, the main equipment of interest in ISR missions is various types of space-based reconnaissance equipment. As is common knowledge in this field, indicators for reconnaissance equipment are generally selected based on reconnaissance results, detection results, and the number of times detection / identification has occurred. Resource information shared by existing simulation systems can be reused.

[0049] Step S4: Design the calculation method for specific evaluation indicators. Design the corresponding indicator calculation method for the specific evaluation indicators constructed in step S3, including statistical rules for input data of indicator calculation based on simulation output data, qualitative evaluation rules and logical judgment.

[0050] Taking the indicators enumerated in step S3 as an example, the calculation methods for each indicator are designed one by one. The reconnaissance result indicator organizes the data in the reconnaissance situation and scenario database, and outputs the reconnaissance result, discovery (identification) time period, and positioning accuracy of each reconnaissance satellite for each target; the detection result indicator organizes the data in the detection event and scenario database, and outputs the positioning accuracy and identification probability of the satellite for the target per second; the discovery count indicator is based on the first selected reconnaissance target, and the output is handled in two ways: one is to assign a default value of 0 to the target that is not in the statistical simulation situation, and the other is to add 1 to the discovery count F if the difference between the two adjacent record times (target discovery time) of the target is greater than 5s (one imaging time); the identification count is calculated in the same way as the discovery count, and records with the reconnaissance result of "identification" are filtered out (i.e., "discovery" is filtered out).

[0051] The calculation method for specific evaluation indicators needs to comprehensively consider many factors such as simulation system architecture, simulation modeling granularity, simulation guidance timing and combat command operations, and be designed and coded based on the actual data interaction of the model system.

[0052] Step S5: Develop an evaluation plan. Based on the Blue Force's operational execution process and the types of information output by the simulation system, obtain the input elements for the evaluation plan, specifically including:

[0053] The simulation system acquires information or documents about the opposing force's combat plans and determines the execution process of the opposing force's combat operations.

[0054] Based on the Blue Force's operational execution process, analyze the operational intent, orders, and plans to obtain the input elements for the evaluation plan and formulate the evaluation plan.

[0055] The specific input elements for the assessment plan include: obtaining the operational objectives, forces of all parties involved in the operation, the Blue Force's command structure and equipment command and control relationships from the operational intent; obtaining the expected effects of each stage of the operational mission, the execution units, key operational targets, a list of key targets for strike based on the operational objectives, and operational risks from the operational orders; and obtaining the operational execution entities, related equipment and targets, and operational content from the operational plan.

[0056] Before inputting the blue force's operational plan information or documents into the simulation system, the blue force's operational plan information or documents can be converted into a file type that the simulation system can recognize and easily process. Then, based on the blue force's operational plan information or documents, the execution process of the blue force's operational actions can be obtained.

[0057] Step S6: Generate indicator framework. Based on the Blue Force Operation Evaluation Theory, design an operation evaluation indicator framework. Extract the operation objectives and quantitatively described action effects and risk cost information from the evaluation plan elements extracted in Step S5, and fill in the content of the indicator framework.

[0058] An indicator system is created with the action objective as the root node. The action effect consists of two categories: effectiveness evaluation indicators based on the capabilities of the opposing side (Red Force) and the capabilities of the opposing side (Blue Force), and execution evaluation indicators based on the specific task execution. The capability indicators of both sides are determined by the troop capabilities of the combatants at the time of evaluation, while the specific task execution evaluation indicators are determined by matching the action execution results in the action plan and the adjudication results. Risks and costs include environmental changes and troop losses, all of which can be directly obtained from step S5. The indicator framework is attached. Figure 2 As shown.

[0059] Step S7: Design performance evaluation indicators. Based on the expected effects of each stage extracted in Step S5, the corresponding execution entities, related equipment, and targets in the action plan are used to obtain a list of equipment types.

[0060] Select the required indicator items from the specific evaluation indicator resources constructed according to step S3, and adjust the indicator calculation method based on step S4. The indicator calculation method includes at least the time and space constraints of statistical rules, the threshold range of qualitative evaluation rules, and the timing of logical judgments.

[0061] Take a target reconnaissance mission as an example to design an effectiveness evaluation index.

[0062] First, the quantities "1 day" and "5 times", the status "reconnaissance", and the relevant party "a certain target" in the effect are used as input constraints for the calculation of the effectiveness index;

[0063] Next, based on common knowledge in this field, the statistics of "reconnaissance" status generally use the detection and identification frequency indicators. The reconnaissance results, detection results, and detection / identification frequency indicators can be selected from the specific evaluation indicator set of reconnaissance equipment according to the mapping logical relationship index.

[0064] Then, adjust the calculation method of the indicators according to the simulation time. When the simulation time is more than 1 day, select the start and end time interval of the statistics. When the simulation time is less than 1 day, the number of discoveries per day = number of discoveries F / simulation time * 24 hours, and the number of recognitions per day = number of recognitions F / simulation time * 24 hours.

[0065] Step S8: Design execution evaluation indicators. Treat each plan in the evaluation scheme as an evaluation task object, and create an execution evaluation indicator for whether the corresponding plan is successfully executed.

[0066] The evaluation scheme iterates through all operational plan entries, generating an indicator node for each plan. Automated calculation of evaluation indicators requires establishing a correlation between the simulation system's action results and the operational actions. First, an operational action (plan) is selected, and the action orders within that action are obtained. Based on the action order's time, associated equipment, and target matching decision output, the correlation between the decision result within the current time window and the action order is established and recorded. Each action order in the operational plan is traversed sequentially, recording successfully matched correlations.

[0067] 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 list them directly according to the actual situation.

[0068] The calculation and judgment of indicators can be achieved by obtaining the execution entity, associated equipment and target matching adjudication output in the action plan. The adjudication results for statistical environmental change are recorded as environmental change, and the adjudication results for statistical troop loss are recorded as troop loss.

[0069] Step S10: Assign evaluation indicator levels. 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 action objective of the lower level is taken as an action effect of the upper level, and steps S6 to S9 are repeated.

[0070] If it is not necessary to output evaluation and analysis separately for each command node, the currently created indicator system can be stored directly; if it is necessary to analyze a command node separately, it is necessary to analyze and obtain the combat plan content related to that command node, and extract the combat objective of that node as the root node.

[0071] This invention discloses a method for constructing evaluation indicators for a space blue force simulation system, comprising 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 force simulation system; Step S3, constructing a resource library of specific evaluation indicators; Step S4, designing calculation methods 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. This invention can, to a certain extent, restore the logic and focus of the evaluation, and simplify the application complexity of the blue force simulation system, providing a solution for constructing the operational evaluation function of a space blue force simulation system.

[0072] It should also be noted that, in this document, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or terminal device that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such a process, method, article, or terminal device. Without further limitations, an element defined by the phrase "comprising one..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article, or terminal device that includes said element.

[0073] Finally, it should be noted that the above description represents a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that although preferred embodiments have been described, those skilled in the art, once they understand the basic inventive concept of the present invention, can make various improvements and modifications without departing from the principles described herein. These improvements and modifications should also be considered within the scope of protection of the present invention. Therefore, the appended claims are intended to be interpreted as including both the preferred embodiments and all changes and modifications falling within the scope of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for constructing an evaluation index of a space navy simulation system, characterized in that, Comprise the following steps: Step S1, design performance evaluation index quantization editing template; Select a variety of design elements to form the performance evaluation index quantization template, and agree on the data type and data representation form of each design element, which is reused with the expected effect of the operational plan; wherein the design elements at least include time, area, related party, state; Step S2, analyze the internal mapping logic of the space blue army simulation system; Step S3, build a specific evaluation index library; Step S4, design the calculation method of the specific evaluation index; Step S5, develop an evaluation plan; according to the blue army operational action execution process and the simulation system output information type, obtain the evaluation plan input element content, which specifically includes: The simulation system obtains the blue army operational plan information or file, and determines the blue army operational action execution process; Based on the analysis of the action intention, action order and action plan of the blue army operational action execution process, the evaluation plan input element content is obtained, and the evaluation plan is developed; The evaluation plan input element content specifically includes: obtaining the operational action purpose, operational force, blue army command system and equipment control relationship from the action intention; obtaining the expected effect of each stage of the operational task, execution unit, key operational target, key attack target list based on the operational target, and action risk from the action order; obtaining the action execution subject, related equipment and target, and action content from the action plan; Step S6, generate index architecture; according to the blue army operational evaluation theory, design the operational evaluation index framework, extract the operational target and the quantized description of the action effect and risk cost type information according to the evaluation plan element content extracted in step S5, and fill in the content of the index architecture; Step S7, design performance evaluation index; according to the expected effect of each stage extracted in step S5, obtain the equipment type list corresponding to the execution subject, related equipment and target in the action plan; Select the required index items from the specific evaluation index resources built in step S3, adjust the index calculation method based on step S4, and the index 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; Step S8, design execution evaluation index; Step S9, design risk item index and analyze risk; each action plan corresponding to the action risk extracted in step S5 is taken as a risk item, the risk item index is created, and the risk is analyzed; Step S10, distribute the evaluation index level.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein, In step S2, the simulated task type, action type and subordinate relationship of operational equipment are obtained from the operational process of the simulation system.

3. The method according to claim 2, wherein, In step S3, the operational tasks and equipment capabilities of interest are selected, the evaluation knowledge reserve is used, the elements representing the task equipment type to achieve the mission task state and result are selected to build the evaluation index, and are included in the specific evaluation index library; In step S4, the corresponding index calculation method is designed for the specific evaluation index built in step S3, including the index calculation input data statistical rule, qualitative evaluation rule and logical judgment based on the simulation output data.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein, In the step S8, each plan in the evaluation scheme is taken as an evaluation task object, and whether the corresponding plan is successfully executed is taken as an execution evaluation index.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein, In the step S10, when it is required to generate a multi-level evaluation report according to the blue army command system and equipment control relationship obtained in the step S5, the combat action purpose of the lower level is taken as an action effect of the upper level, and the step S6 to the step S9 are repeated.

Images