Information physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis

Abstract

The invention provides an information physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis, and belongs to the technical field of information physical system architecture.The method comprises the steps that a relation mode of architecture evaluation indexes, evaluation objects and evaluation methods is constructed; extracting system architecture features of the information physical system architecture based on an architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method of design service scene targets and architecture attributes; based on an architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, the architecture features are decomposed, and an architecture evaluation index set and a system element parameter set are constructed; the system element evaluation score is determined based on the system element parameter analysis and comparison evaluation method; the comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic is realized, the comprehensive evaluation score of the system architecture is determined, and the comprehensive evaluation of the information physical system architecture is realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of information-physical system architecture analysis, and in particular to an information-physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis. Background Art

[0002] A cyber-physical system (CPS) is a system that integrates advanced perception, computing, communication, and control technologies. It achieves real-time perception, dynamic control, and information services of the physical world through the close coupling and collaboration of physical and computing components. With the rapid development of information technology, cyber-physical systems are playing an increasingly important role in smart manufacturing, smart transportation, smart grids, and other fields. However, as the scale and complexity of the system increase, how to effectively evaluate the architecture of cyber-physical systems has become a technical challenge.

[0003] Traditional cyber-physical system architecture evaluation methods often focus on a single performance indicator or local optimization, lacking comprehensive consideration of the overall system performance and multi-dimensional characteristics. These methods usually do not fully consider the interactions and dependencies between system elements, resulting in the evaluation results may not fully reflect the actual performance of the system. In addition, the existing methods often lack accuracy and systematicity when dealing with the conversion between scenario goals and architecture evaluation indicators, resulting in the inability to build an effective multi-objective architecture optimization model, and thus making it difficult to achieve scenario-driven architecture trade-off optimization. In recent years, some scholars and engineers have tried to develop a variety of evaluation tools and models, such as simulation-based evaluation, model-based evaluation, and data analysis-based evaluation. These methods have achieved certain results in specific application scenarios, but they still need to be improved in terms of versatility, flexibility, and accuracy. Therefore, how to achieve accurate, systematic, and comprehensive evaluation of cyber-physical system architecture under the premise of ensuring effective conversion of scenario goals, multi-objective collaborative evaluation optimization, and scenario-driven evaluation optimization is an urgent problem to be solved. Summary of the invention

[0004] The purpose of the present invention is to provide an information-physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis to solve at least one technical problem existing in the above-mentioned background technology.

[0005] In order to achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0006] In a first aspect, the present invention provides a method for evaluating an information-physical system architecture based on system element analysis, comprising:

[0007] Aiming at the architecture elements and evaluation requirements of cyber-physical systems, we build an evaluation and analysis layer for cyber-physical system architecture.

[0008] Based on the service scenario goals and architecture attributes of the cyber-physical system architecture design, the multi-dimensional feature extraction method of the architecture is applied to determine the system architecture characteristics;

[0009] Based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, the architecture features are decomposed to determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters;

[0010] Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, determine the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator;

[0011] A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture.

[0012] In a second aspect, the present invention provides a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation system based on system element analysis, comprising:

[0013] Building modules for building the cyber-physical system architecture assessment and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and assessment requirements;

[0014] The extraction module is used to design service scenario goals and architecture attributes based on the cyber-physical system architecture, apply the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method, and determine the system architecture characteristics;

[0015] The decomposition module is used to decompose the architecture features and determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method;

[0016] A determination module is used to determine the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods;

[0017] The evaluation module is used to implement a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture based on a comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic.

[0018] In a third aspect, the present invention provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, which is used to store computer instructions. When the computer instructions are executed by a processor, the information-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in the first aspect is implemented.

[0019] In a fourth aspect, the present invention provides a computer device comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the processor and the memory communicate with each other, the memory stores program instructions executable by the processor, and the processor calls the program instructions to execute the information-physical system architecture assessment method based on system element analysis as described in the first aspect.

[0020] In a fifth aspect, the present invention provides an electronic device, comprising: a processor, a memory, and a computer program; wherein the processor is connected to the memory, and the computer program is stored in the memory, and when the electronic device is running, the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory so that the electronic device executes instructions for implementing the information-physical system architecture assessment method based on system element analysis as described in the first aspect.

[0021] The beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: a relationship model between architecture evaluation indicators, evaluation objects and evaluation methods is constructed; the system architecture characteristics of the information-physical system architecture are extracted based on the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method of the design service scenario goals and architecture attributes; based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, the architecture features are decomposed to construct an architecture evaluation indicator set and a system element parameter set; an evaluation method based on system element parameter analysis and comparison is implemented to determine the system element evaluation score; a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic is implemented to determine the system architecture comprehensive evaluation score, and a comprehensive evaluation of the information-physical system architecture is implemented.

[0022] Additional advantages of the present invention will be more clearly given in the following description or learned through the practice of the present invention. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0023] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the accompanying drawings required for use in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other accompanying drawings can be obtained based on these accompanying drawings without paying creative work.

[0024] Figure 1 A flowchart of a method for evaluating an information-physical system architecture based on system element analysis according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0025] Figure 2 A schematic diagram of a design service scenario for architecture design according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0026] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of a system architecture based on a design service scenario according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0027] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the architecture analysis layer structure according to an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0028] The embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below, and examples of the embodiments are shown in the accompanying drawings, wherein the same or similar reference numerals throughout represent the same or similar elements or elements with the same or similar functions. The embodiments described below by the accompanying drawings are exemplary and are only used to explain the present invention, and cannot be interpreted as limiting the present invention.

[0029] It should be understood by those skilled in the art that unless otherwise defined, all terms (including technical and scientific terms) used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by those skilled in the art to which this invention belongs.

[0030] It should also be understood that terms, such as those defined in commonly used dictionaries, should be understood to have a meaning consistent with that in the context of the prior art and will not be interpreted in an idealized or overly formal sense unless as defined herein.

[0031] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that, unless otherwise stated, the singular forms "a", "an", "said" and "the" used herein may also include plural forms. It should be further understood that the term "comprising" used in the specification of the present invention refers to the presence of the features, integers, steps, operations, elements and / or components, but does not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements and / or groups thereof.

[0032] In the description of this specification, the description with reference to the terms "one embodiment", "some embodiments", "example", "specific example", or "some examples" means that the specific features, structures, materials or characteristics described in conjunction with the embodiment or example are included in at least one embodiment or example of the present invention. Moreover, the specific features, structures, materials or characteristics described may be combined in any one or more embodiments or examples in a suitable manner. Different embodiments or examples described in this specification and features of different embodiments or examples may be combined and combined by those skilled in the art without contradiction.

[0033] To facilitate understanding of the present invention, the present invention is further explained below with reference to specific embodiments in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, and the specific embodiments do not constitute a limitation on the embodiments of the present invention.

[0034] Those skilled in the art should understand that the drawings are merely schematic diagrams of embodiments, and the components in the drawings are not necessarily necessary for implementing the present invention.

[0035] The present invention discloses an information-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, designs an information-physical system architecture evaluation analysis layer construction method, and constructs a relationship model between architecture evaluation indicators, evaluation objects and evaluation methods. A multi-dimensional architecture feature extraction method based on design service scenario goals and architecture attributes is designed to extract system architecture features of the information-physical system architecture. A method based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling is designed to decompose architecture features and construct an architecture evaluation indicator set and a system element parameter set. An evaluation method based on system element parameter analysis and comparison is implemented to determine the system element evaluation score. A comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic is implemented to determine the comprehensive evaluation score of the system architecture and realize the comprehensive evaluation of the information-physical system architecture.

[0036] Example 1

[0037] In this embodiment 1, first, a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation system based on system element analysis is provided, including: a construction module, which is used to construct an cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; an extraction module, which is used to determine system architecture characteristics by applying an architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes; a decomposition module, which is used to decompose architecture characteristics based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods, and determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; a determination module, which is used to determine the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods; and an evaluation module, which is used to implement a comprehensive evaluation of cyber-physical system architecture based on a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic.

[0038] In this embodiment, the above-mentioned system is used to implement an information-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, including the following steps: Step 1: Construct an information-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on the information-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; Step 2: Based on the information-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, apply the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method to determine the system architecture characteristics; Step 3: Based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, decompose the architecture features to determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; Step 4: Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, determine the evaluation score of the system element in each architecture evaluation indicator; Step 5: Based on the comprehensive evaluation method of architecture logic, realize the comprehensive evaluation of the information-physical system architecture.

[0039] In the step 1, the evaluation and analysis layer of the information-physical system architecture is constructed in view of the elements and evaluation requirements of the information-physical system architecture, which specifically includes: in order to evaluate the information-physical system architecture, it is necessary to construct the information-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer, which includes an architecture evaluation and analysis set, an architecture information library, and an architecture analysis method set. The architecture evaluation and analysis set includes an architecture feature set, an architecture evaluation indicator set, a system element parameter set, and evaluation and analysis structure information; the architecture information library includes the design service scenario, the design system architecture, the system element library, and the element parameter association relationship; the architecture analysis method set includes an architecture analysis method and an architecture evaluation method.

[0040] In step 2, based on the service scenario goals and architecture attributes of the cyber-physical system architecture design, an architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method is applied to determine the system architecture features, specifically including:

[0041] For a given cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario, determine the scenario target set T = {t1, t2, ..., t i}, where t i Represents the i-th scenario goal of the design service scenario;

[0042] For the information-physical system architecture built for the design service scenario, determine the architecture attribute set A = {a1, a2, ..., a j}, where a j represents the jth architectural attribute of the cyber-physical system architecture;

[0043] For the determined sets T and A, we can obtain the target performance set M of the scene target under specific architecture attributes. The relationship between set M and sets T and A is:

[0044] M=T×A={(t n , a m )|n, m∈N, 1≤n≤i, 1≤m≤j}

[0045] Wherein, the set M is the Cartesian product of the sets T and A, and the element scene target representation m in the set M is composed of an ordered pair (t, a);

[0046] For a certain set M, specific architectural features c can be extracted to form an architectural feature set C:

[0047]

[0048] The set of multidimensional feature extraction methods is a function set F1 = {f 11 , f 12 , ..., f 1l}, the element f1 in F1 is a specific architecture multidimensional feature extraction method, which can further constrain the relationship as follows:

[0049]

[0050] Among them, P(M) represents the power set of set M, represents any non-empty subset of the set M.

[0051] In step 3, based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, the architecture features are decomposed to determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters, specifically including:

[0052] The set of architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods is the function set F2 = {f 21 , f 22 , ..., f 2l}, the element f2 in F2 is a specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, and the following relationship can be established for a specific architecture feature set C:

[0053] g1:C×F2→I,f2(c j , f2)=i

[0054] g2: I×F2→P, f2(i, f2)=p

[0055] Where g1 represents the process of generating one or more architecture evaluation indicators i through specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method f2 of architecture feature c, which is represented by the Cartesian product of set C and set F2; g2 represents the process of generating one or more system element parameters p through specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method f2 of architecture evaluation indicator i, which is represented by the Cartesian product of set I and set F2; i is the architecture evaluation indicator set I = {i1, i2, ..., i i}; p is a system element parameter set P = {p1, p2, ..., p i}.

[0056] In step 4, based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, the evaluation scores of the system elements in each architecture evaluation index are determined, specifically including:

[0057] The system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 is:

[0058] H1=H 11 ∪H 12 ∪H 13 ={h 111 , ..., h 11i ,h 121 , ..., h 12 j, h 131 , ..., h 13k}

[0059] That is, the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 should at least include the system element parameter evaluation method set H 11 , the set of evaluation score normalization methods H 12 , evaluate the comparative analysis method set H 13 .

[0060] For a specific system element set E = {e1, e2, ..., e i} and the corresponding system element parameter set P and architecture evaluation indicator set I, the following relationship can be established:

[0061]

[0062] Among them, g 31 The system element e and the corresponding system element parameter p are evaluated by a specific system element parameter evaluation method h 11 Generate an evaluation score s for architecture evaluation metric i ** The process uses the set E, set P, set I and set H 11 The Cartesian product of 32 Representative evaluation score ** Through the specific system element parameter evaluation method h 12 Generate a standardized evaluation score s * The process of using the set S ** With the set H 12 The Cartesian product of 33 Represents standardized assessment scores * Through specific evaluation and comparative analysis methods 13 The process of generating a comparison of standardized evaluation scores s, using the set S * With the set H 13 The Cartesian product of is represented as follows: is the evaluation score set S ** For system elements i The corresponding factor parameter p j In the evaluation index i l An evaluation score value generated by the aspect, is the evaluation score in the standardized evaluation score set S* Standardized results of jkl1 is to compare the standardized evaluation scores in the standardized evaluation score set S The comparative results.

[0063] Or the above process can be expressed as follows:

[0064] g3:E×P×I×H1→S,h1(e j , p k ,i l , h1)=sjkl1

[0065] Wherein, g3 represents the process of generating a certain comparative standardized evaluation score s on the evaluation index i by using a specific system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method h1 for the system element e and the corresponding system element parameter p, which is represented by the Cartesian product of the set E, the set P, the set I and the set H1; s jkl1 It is the comparison of the standardized evaluation score set S for the system element e j and the corresponding factor parameter p k In the evaluation index i l Comparative standardized assessment scores in terms of

[0066] In step 5, a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic is used to implement a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture, specifically including:

[0067] The comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for the architecture logic of cyber-physical systems is:

[0068] H2=H 21 ∪H 22 ={h 211 , ..., h 21i ,h 221 , ..., h 22j}

[0069] That is, the comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for the architecture logic of the information-physical system should at least include the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 H 22 .

[0070] Among them, the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 It should at least include the set of comprehensive evaluation methods H 211 , Linear structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 212 , tree structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 213 , a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for network structures H 214 ,Right now:

[0071]

[0072] Comparison of the given system elements e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on the evaluation index i gives a standardized evaluation score s e1 With s e2 , let the element relationship be R(e1, e2), the following relationship can be established:

[0073]

[0074] Among them, SI i (se1 ,s e2 ) is the comparative standardized evaluation score s of given system elements e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on the evaluation index i e1 With s e2 After the logical synthesis evaluation score of the architecture logic synthesis, based on this relationship, traversing all the elements of the system, the logical synthesis evaluation score SI of the system architecture on the evaluation index can be obtained. i :

[0075] SI i =SI i (s e1 ,s e2 ,s e3 , ..., s en )

[0076] The logical comprehensive evaluation score set SII = {SI1, SI2, ..., SI n}, the following relationship can be established:

[0077]

[0078] Among them, W i is the weight of evaluation index i in the comprehensive architecture evaluation, and is obtained through the comprehensive architecture method h 22 The analysis logic comprehensive evaluation score set SII is determined; L is the architecture comprehensive score, which represents the comprehensive score of the information physical system architecture in the application scenario, and is calculated by the weight W of all architecture evaluation indicators i. i Corresponding to the logical comprehensive assessment score SI i The product and determination of .

[0079] Example 2

[0080] Reference Figure 1 This embodiment provides a method for evaluating the architecture of an information-physical system based on system element analysis, and the specific method includes:

[0081] Step S101: Constructing the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer Figure 4 As shown, it specifically includes: architecture evaluation and analysis set, architecture information library and architecture analysis method set. The architecture evaluation and analysis set includes architecture feature set, architecture evaluation indicator set, system element parameter set and evaluation and analysis structure information; the architecture information library includes design service scenario, design system architecture, system element library and element parameter association relationship; the architecture analysis method set includes architecture analysis method and architecture evaluation method. Figure 1 , providing content for the evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture built for the design service scenario. The specific content provided is as follows:

[0082] (1) The architecture evaluation analysis set is stored and displayed in a database, based on the subsequent architecture feature extraction and analysis, and consists of an architecture feature set, an architecture evaluation indicator set, a system element parameter set, and evaluation analysis structure information: the architecture feature set includes architecture features and feature descriptions; the architecture evaluation indicator set includes architecture evaluation indicators and evaluation indicator descriptions; the system element parameter set includes element parameters and parameter descriptions; the evaluation analysis structure information includes the association information between architecture features and evaluation indicators, the association information between evaluation indicators and element parameters, and the organization mode of the evaluation analysis set. Part of the content of the architecture evaluation analysis set is shown in Table 1.

[0083] Table 1 Contents of some architecture evaluation analysis sets

[0084]

[0085]

[0086] (2) Refer to the attached Figure 2 , a design service scenario presented in graphic form, including a scenario diagram, the types of elements contained in the scenario (such as roadside equipment, communication facilities, etc.), scenario functions (such as traffic flow perception, information transmission, etc.), scenario goals (taking economy and functional applicability as examples) and scenario description.

[0087] (3) Refer to the attached Figure 3 , a system architecture based on the design service scenario is displayed in a graphical form, including the distribution relationship between scenario functions in scenario element types (such as the distribution of traffic flow perception function to roadside equipment), the logical relationship between functions (such as after the traffic flow perception function of the roadside facility is running, the information transmission function is carried out by the communication facilities), and the architecture design description (such as the description of the architecture attributes). When there are multiple architectures designed for the same design service scenario, the architecture design pattern should be marked (such as the central cloud architecture design pattern).

[0088] (4) Based on the element types contained in the scenario, the database is used to store and display the scope of each type of system element. Based on the determined system element scope, the association between the system element and the element parameter set is established, and the actual value of the system element at the parameter is determined. The content of the association between the system element library and the element parameter is shown in Table 2 below.

[0089] Table 2

[0090]

[0091]

[0092] (5) A set of architecture analysis methods expressed in mathematical formulas and implemented in the form of algorithms or programs, including architecture analysis methods and architecture evaluation methods.

[0093] Step S102: Determine system architecture features, design service scenario goals and architecture attributes based on the cyber-physical system architecture, apply the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method, and determine system architecture features, specifically including:

[0094] For a given cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario, determine the scenario target set T = {t1, t2, ..., t i}, where t i Represents the i-th scenario goal of the design service scenario;

[0095] For the information-physical system architecture built for the design service scenario, determine the architecture attribute set A = {a1, a2, ..., a j}, where a j represents the jth architectural attribute of the cyber-physical system architecture;

[0096] For the determined sets T and A, we can obtain the target performance set M of the scene target under specific architecture attributes. The relationship between set M and sets T and A is:

[0097] M=T×A={(t n , a m )|n, m∈N, 1≤n≤i, 1≤m≤j}

[0098] Wherein, the set M is the Cartesian product of the sets T and A, and the element scene target representation m in the set M is composed of an ordered pair (t, a);

[0099] For a certain set M, specific architectural features c can be extracted to form an architectural feature set C:

[0100]

[0101] The set of multidimensional feature extraction methods is a function set F1 = {f 11 , f 12 , ..., f 1l}, the element f1 in F1 is a specific architecture multidimensional feature extraction method, which can further constrain the relationship as follows:

[0102]

[0103] Among them, P(M) represents the power set of set M, represents any non-empty subset of the set M.

[0104] Combined with Figure 2 The scene objectives and attachments Figure 3 The architecture attributes in , can construct the target performance set of scenario targets under specific architecture attributes as shown in Table 3 below.

[0105] Table 3. Target performance of scenario targets under specific architecture attributes

[0106]

[0107] The target performance is screened by applying the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method, and the ordered pairs are replaced by text-like nouns to generate architecture features. The architecture features include: economy of use represented by (economy, functionality); economy of maintenance represented by (economy, maintainability); and functional correctness represented by (functional applicability, reliability).

[0108] Step S103: Determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters. Based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods, decompose the architecture features to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters, including:

[0109] The set of architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods is the function set F2 = {f 21 , f 22 , ..., f 2l}, the element f2 in F2 is a specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, and the following relationship can be established for a specific architecture feature set C:

[0110] g1:C×F2→I,f2(c j , f2)=i

[0111] g2: I×F2→P, f2(i, f2)=p

[0112] Where g1 represents the process of generating one or more architecture evaluation indicators i through specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method f2 of architecture feature c, which is represented by the Cartesian product of set C and set F2; g2 represents the process of generating one or more system element parameters p through specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method f2 of architecture evaluation indicator i, which is represented by the Cartesian product of set I and set F2; i is the architecture evaluation indicator set I = {i1, i2, ..., i i}; p is a system element parameter set P = {p1, p2, ..., p i}.

[0113] The architecture feature analysis and decoupling method is applied to the determined architecture features, such as economic use, maintenance economy, and functional correctness. The architecture evaluation indicators (system service capability, hardware usage cost, hardware maintenance cost) that are associated with the architecture features and can be quantitatively analyzed are analyzed and selected. Based on the evaluation indicators, the system element parameters (memory, bandwidth, number of elements, etc.) related to the evaluation indicators are determined. The architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters obtained by the decoupling analysis of the architecture feature set are shown in Table 4 below.

[0114] Table 4 Architecture feature decoupling analysis content

[0115]

[0116] Step S104: Determine the evaluation scores of the system elements in each architecture evaluation index. Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, determine the evaluation scores of the system elements in each architecture evaluation index, specifically including:

[0117] The system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 is:

[0118] H1=H 11 ∪H 12 ∪H 13 ={h 111 , ..., h 11i ,h 121 , ..., h 12 j, h 131 , ..., h 13k}

[0119] That is, the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 should at least include the system element parameter evaluation method set H 11 , the set of evaluation score normalization methods H 12 , evaluate the comparative analysis method set H 13 .

[0120] For a specific system element set E = {e1, e2, ..., e i} and the corresponding system element parameter set P and architecture evaluation indicator set I, the following relationship can be established:

[0121]

[0122] Among them, g 31 The system element e and the corresponding system element parameter p are evaluated by a specific system element parameter evaluation method h 11 Generate an evaluation score s for architecture evaluation metric i ** The process uses the set E, set P, set I and set H 11 The Cartesian product of 32 Representative evaluation score ** Through the specific system element parameter evaluation method h 12 Generate a standardized evaluation score s * The process of using the set S ** With the set H 12 The Cartesian product of 33 Represents standardized assessment scores * Through specific evaluation and comparative analysis methods 13 The process of generating a comparison of standardized evaluation scores s, using the set S* With the set H 13 The Cartesian product of is represented as follows: is the evaluation score set S ** For system elements i The corresponding factor parameter p j In the evaluation index i l An evaluation score value generated by the aspect, is the evaluation score in the standardized evaluation score set S* Standardized results of jkl1 is to compare the standardized evaluation scores in the standardized evaluation score set S The comparative results.

[0123] Or the above process can be expressed as follows:

[0124] g3:E×P×I×H1→S,h1(e j , p k ,i l , h1)=s jkl1

[0125] Wherein, g3 represents the process of generating a certain comparative standardized evaluation score s on the evaluation index i by using a specific system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method h1 for the system element e and the corresponding system element parameter p, which is represented by the Cartesian product of the set E, the set P, the set I and the set H1; s jkl1 It is the comparison of the standardized evaluation score set S for the system element e j and the corresponding factor parameter p k In the evaluation index i l Comparative standardized assessment scores in terms of

[0126] Some selected system elements and related parameters are shown in Table 5 below.

[0127] Table 5 Some system elements and related parameters

[0128] Feature name General performance server High-performance servers Feature name 4G base station 5G Base Station Cost 3000 yuan / year 10,000 yuan / year Cost 2000 yuan / year 6000 yuan / year Maintenance costs 800 yuan / year 1200 yuan / year Maintenance costs 3000 yuan / year 6000 yuan / year processor 2 cores 8 cores Coverage 3 km 0.5 km Memory 4GiB 64GiB Peak rate 1Gbps 20Gbps storage 512GB 2TB Latency 10ms <1ms bandwidth 1Gbps 10Gbps Traffic density <![CDATA[0.1Tbps / Km 2 ]]> <![CDATA[10Tbps / Km 2 ]]>

[0129] Assume that the evaluation index score is 0-10 points. The higher the evaluation score, the better the performance of the system element related evaluation index. The score of each system element parameter in the evaluation index system service capability a, hardware usage cost b, and hardware maintenance cost c is represented by a three-element array (a, b, c). When the element parameter is not scored in a certain evaluation index, it is represented by "-". The comparative standardized evaluation scores of each parameter of the system element are shown in Table 6 below.

[0130] Table 6 Comparison of standardized evaluation scores of some system element parameters

[0131] Feature name General performance server High-performance servers 4G base station 5G Base Station Cost (-，8，-) (-，6，-) (-，9，-) (-，7，-) Maintenance costs (-，-，8) (-，-，7) (-，-，8) (-，-，7) processor (6，-，-) (9，-，-) Memory (6，-，-) (9，-，-) storage (6，-，-) (9，-，-) bandwidth (6，-，-) (9，-，-) Coverage (8，8，-) (6，7，-) Peak rate (6，-，-) (9，-，-) Latency (7，-，-) (8，-，-) Traffic density (7，-，-) (9，-，-)

[0132] Step S105: A comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic is used to implement a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture, specifically including:

[0133] The comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for the architecture logic of cyber-physical systems is:

[0134] H2=H 21 ∪H 22 ={h 211 , ..., h 21i ,h 221 , ..., h 22j}

[0135] That is, the comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for the architecture logic of the information-physical system should at least include the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 H 22 .

[0136] Among them, the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 It should at least include the set of comprehensive evaluation methods H 211 , Linear structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 212 , tree structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 213 , a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for network structures H 214 ,Right now:

[0137]

[0138] Comparison of the given system elements e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on the evaluation index i gives a standardized evaluation score s e1 With s e2 , let the element relationship be R(e1, e2), the following relationship can be established:

[0139]

[0140] Among them, SI i (s e1 ,s e2 ) is the comparative standardized evaluation score s of given system elements e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on the evaluation index i e1 With s e2 After the logical synthesis evaluation score of the architecture logic synthesis, based on this relationship, traversing all the elements of the system, the logical synthesis evaluation score SI of the system architecture on the evaluation index can be obtained. i :

[0141] SI i =SI i (s e1 ,se2 ,s e3 , ..., s en )

[0142] The logical comprehensive evaluation score set SII = {SI1, SI2, ..., SI n}, the following relationship can be established:

[0143]

[0144] Among them, W i is the weight of evaluation index i in the comprehensive architecture evaluation, and is obtained through the comprehensive architecture method h 22 The analysis logic comprehensive evaluation score set SII is determined; L is the architecture comprehensive score, which represents the comprehensive score of the information physical system architecture in the application scenario, and is calculated by the weight W of all architecture evaluation indicators i. i Corresponding to the logical comprehensive assessment score SI i The product and determination of .

[0145] A comprehensive evaluation of the design architecture is conducted. The analysis of the designed architecture shows that the architecture design of the central cloud architecture design mode and the edge cloud architecture design mode differs only in the two functions of information transmission and intersection signal simulation optimization and related logic. Therefore, the main focus is on the logical comprehensive evaluation scores of the system elements related to the evaluation function module. Assuming that the edge cloud can only use general servers to implement intersection simulation signal optimization as a constraint restriction system element solution, combined with the comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic, the logical comprehensive evaluation scores of various types of architecture evaluation indicators under different solutions can be obtained as shown in Table 7.

[0146] Table 7 Logical comprehensive evaluation scores of each system element solution

[0147] System elements solution System service capabilities Hardware usage cost Hardware maintenance costs Solution 1: Central cloud + 4G + general server 8.02 7.43 6.40 Solution 2: Central cloud + 5G + general server 9.22 7.24 7.47 Solution 3: Central cloud + 4G + high-performance server 9.51 4.55 0.99 Solution 4: Central cloud + 5G + high-performance server 9.81 6.73 7.00 Solution 5: Edge cloud + 4G + general server 8.68 8.24 8.00 Solution 6: Edge cloud + 5G + general server 9.48 7.24 7.47

[0148] After obtaining the logical comprehensive evaluation scores of each scheme, different indicator weights can be selected to calculate the comprehensive scores of the architecture under different schemes, as shown in Table 8 below.

[0149] Table 8 Comprehensive scores of each system element solution architecture under different weights

[0150] System elements solution 0.8,0.16,0.04 0.6,0.32,0.08 0.5,0.4,0.1 Solution 1: Central cloud + 4G + general server 7.8608 7.7016 7.6220 Solution 2: Central cloud + 5G + general server 8.8332 8.4464 8.2530 Solution 3: Central cloud + 4G + high-performance server 8.3756 7.2412 6.6740 Solution 4: Central cloud + 5G + high-performance server 9.2048 8.5996 8.2970 Solution 5: Edge cloud + 4G + general server 8.5824 8.4848 8.4360 Solution 6: Edge cloud + 5G + general server 9.0412 8.6024 8.3830

[0151] Combined with the comprehensive scores, it can be seen that when the weight of system service capability is high (such as in scenarios with heavy traffic), the central cloud architecture design model has advantages over the edge cloud architecture design model, and when the weight of hardware usage cost and hardware maintenance cost is high (such as traffic flow control in remote areas), the edge cloud architecture design model has more advantages; in addition, the relevant comprehensive scores show that specific system element solutions (such as Solution 3) are generally not advantageous, so they should be avoided in actual architecture design, providing optimization suggestions for the system information-physical architecture design.

[0152] Example 3

[0153] The present embodiment 3 provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is used to store computer instructions, and when the computer instructions are executed by a processor, the method for evaluating the architecture of a cyber-physical system based on system element analysis as described above is implemented, the method comprising: constructing an evaluation and analysis layer for the architecture of a cyber-physical system in view of the architecture elements and evaluation requirements of the cyber-physical system; applying an architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method to determine the system architecture features based on the service scenario goals and architecture attributes of the cyber-physical system architecture design; decomposing the architecture features based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method to determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; determining the evaluation scores of the system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method;

[0154] A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture.

[0155] Example 4

[0156] This embodiment 4 provides a computer device, including a memory and a processor, the processor and the memory communicate with each other, the memory stores program instructions that can be executed by the processor, and the processor calls the program instructions to execute the information-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described above, the method comprising: constructing an information-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on information-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; based on the information-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, applying an architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method to determine system architecture features; based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods, decomposing architecture features to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods, determining the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator; based on a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic, realizing a comprehensive evaluation of the information-physical system architecture.

[0157] Example 5

[0158] This embodiment 5 provides an electronic device, including: a processor, a memory and a computer program; wherein the processor is connected to the memory, and the computer program is stored in the memory. When the electronic device is running, the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory so that the electronic device executes instructions for implementing the information-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described above, the method including: constructing an information-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on information-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; based on the information-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, applying an architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method to determine system architecture features; based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods, decomposing architecture features to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods, determining the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator; based on a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic, realizing a comprehensive evaluation of the information-physical system architecture.

[0159] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that embodiments of the present invention may be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, the present invention may take the form of a complete hardware embodiment, a complete software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware. Moreover, the present invention may take the form of a computer program product implemented on one or more computer-usable storage media (including but not limited to disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0160] The present invention is described with reference to flowcharts and / or block diagrams of methods, devices (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the present invention. It should be understood that each process and / or block in the flowchart and / or block diagram, as well as the combination of processes and / or blocks in the flowchart and / or block diagram, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, an embedded processor, or other programmable data processing device to produce a machine, so that the instructions executed by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device generate instructions for implementing the processes in the flowchart and / or block diagram. Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in a block or multiple blocks.

[0161] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory capable of directing a computer or other programmable data processing device to operate in a specific manner, so that the instructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce an article of manufacture comprising an instruction device, which implements the process Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A function specified in one or more boxes.

[0162] These computer program instructions can also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing device, and a series of operating steps are executed on the computer or other programmable device to produce a computer-implemented process, so that the instructions executed on the computer or other programmable device provide for implementing the process. Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The steps for the functions specified in one or more boxes.

[0163] Although the above describes the specific implementation mode of the present invention in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, it is not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention. Those skilled in the art should understand that various modifications or variations that can be made by those skilled in the art without creative labor on the basis of the technical solution disclosed in the present invention should be included in the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, characterized in that: include: Aiming at the architecture elements and evaluation requirements of cyber-physical systems, we build an evaluation and analysis layer for cyber-physical system architecture. Based on the service scenario goals and architecture attributes of the cyber-physical system architecture design, the multi-dimensional feature extraction method of the architecture is applied to determine the system architecture characteristics; Based on the analysis of architectural features and decoupling methods, the architectural features are decomposed to determine the architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters; Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, determine the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator; A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture.

2. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Construct the cyber-physical system architecture assessment and analysis layer, including: architecture assessment and analysis set, architecture information library and architecture analysis method set. The architecture assessment and analysis set includes architecture feature set, architecture assessment indicator set, system element parameter set and assessment and analysis structure information; the architecture information library includes design service scenarios, design system architecture, system element library and element parameter association; the architecture analysis method set includes architecture analysis method and architecture assessment method.

3. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Based on the service scenario goals and architecture attributes of the cyber-physical system architecture design, the multi-dimensional feature extraction method of the application architecture is used to determine the system architecture characteristics, including: For a given cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario, determine the scenario target set T = {t1, t2, …, t i }, where t i Represents the i-th scenario goal of the design service scenario; For the information-physical system architecture built for the design service scenario, determine the architecture attribute set A = {a1, a2, …, a j }, where a j represents the jth architectural attribute of the cyber-physical system architecture; For the determined sets T and A, we can obtain the target performance set M of the scene target under specific architecture attributes. The relationship between set M and sets T and A is: M=T×A={(t n ,a m )|n,m∈N,1≤n≤i,1≤m≤j} Wherein, the set M is the Cartesian product of the sets T and A, and the element scene target representation m in the set M is composed of an ordered pair (t, a); For a certain set M, specific architectural features c can be extracted to form an architectural feature set C: The architecture multidimensional feature extraction method set is the function set F1 = {f 11 ,f 12 ,…,f 1l }, the element f1 in F1 is a specific architecture multidimensional feature extraction method, which further constrains the relationship as follows: Among them, P(M) represents the power set of set M, represents any non-empty subset of the set M.

4. The method for evaluating the cyber-physical system architecture based on system element analysis according to claim 1, characterized in that: Based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, the architecture features are decomposed to determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters, including: The set of architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods is the function set F2 = {f 21 ,f 22 ,…,f 2l }, the element f2 in F2 is a specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, and the following relationship can be established for a specific architecture feature set C: g1:C×F2→I,f2(c j ,f2)=i g2:I×F2→P,f2(i,f2)=p Where g1 represents the process of generating one or more architecture evaluation indicators i through specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method f2 of architecture feature c, which is represented by the Cartesian product of set C and set F2; g2 represents the process of generating one or more system element parameters p through specific architecture feature analysis and decoupling method f2 of architecture evaluation indicator i, which is represented by the Cartesian product of set I and set F2; i is the architecture evaluation indicator set I = {i1, i2, …, i i }; p is a system element parameter set P = {p1, p2, ..., p i }.

5. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index are determined, including: The system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 is: H1=H 11 ∪H 12 ∪H 13 ={h 111 ,…,h 11i ,h 121 ,…,h 12j ,h 131 ,…,h 13k } That is, the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 should at least include the system element parameter evaluation method set H 11 , the set of evaluation score normalization methods H 12 , evaluate the comparative analysis method set H 13 ; For a specific system element set E = {e1, e2, …, e i } and the corresponding system element parameter set P and architecture evaluation index set I, establish the following relationship: Among them, g 31 The system element e and the corresponding system element parameter p are evaluated by a specific system element parameter evaluation method h 11 Generate an evaluation score s for architecture evaluation metric i ** The process uses the set E, the set P, the set I and the set H 11 The Cartesian product of 32 Representative evaluation score ** Through the specific system element parameter evaluation method h 12 Generate a standardized evaluation score s * The process of using the set S ** With the set H 12 The Cartesian product of 33 Represents standardized assessment scores * Through specific evaluation and comparative analysis methods h 13 The process of generating a comparison of standardized evaluation scores s, using the set S * With the set H 13 The Cartesian product of is represented as follows: is the evaluation score set S ** For system elements i The corresponding factor parameter p j In the evaluation index i l An evaluation score value generated by the aspect, is the set of standardized evaluation scores S * Targeted assessment scores Standardized results of jkl1 is to compare the standardized evaluation scores in the standardized evaluation score set S The comparative results.

6. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1 is characterized in that: A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture, including: The comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for the architecture logic of cyber-physical systems is: H2=H 21 ∪H 22 ={h 211 ,…,h 21i ,h 221 ,…,h 22j } That is, the comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for the architecture logic of the cyber-physical system should at least include the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 H 22 . Among them, the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 It should at least include the set of comprehensive evaluation methods H 211 , Linear structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 212 , tree structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 213 , a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for network structures H 214 ,Right now: Comparison of the given system elements e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on the evaluation index i gives a standardized evaluation score s e1 With s e2 , let the element relationship be R(e1,e2), the following relationship can be established: Among them, SI i (s e1 ,s e2 ) is the comparative standardized evaluation score s of given system elements e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on the evaluation index i e1 With s e2 After the logic synthesis of the architecture, based on this relationship, traversing all the elements of the system, the logic synthesis evaluation score SI of the system architecture on the evaluation index i can be obtained. i : SI i =SI i (with e1 ,with e2 ,with e3 ,…,with en ) The logical comprehensive evaluation score set SII = {SI1, SI2, ..., SI n }, the following relationship can be established: Among them, W i is the weight of evaluation index i in the comprehensive evaluation of architecture, and is obtained through the comprehensive architecture method h 22 The analysis logic comprehensive evaluation score set SII is determined; L is the architecture comprehensive score, which represents the comprehensive score of the information physical system architecture in the application scenario, and is calculated by the weight W of all architecture evaluation indicators i. i Corresponding to the logical comprehensive assessment score SI i The product and determination of .

7. A cyber-physical system architecture evaluation system based on system element analysis, characterized in that: include: Building modules for building the cyber-physical system architecture assessment and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and assessment requirements; The extraction module is used to design service scenario goals and architecture attributes based on the cyber-physical system architecture, apply the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method, and determine the system architecture characteristics; The decomposition module is used to decompose the architecture features and determine the architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method; A determination module is used to determine the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods; The evaluation module is used to implement a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture based on a comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic.

8. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is used to store computer instructions, and when the computer instructions are executed by the processor, the information-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in any one of claims 1 to 6 is implemented.

9. A computer device, characterized in that: It includes a memory and a processor, the processor and the memory communicate with each other, the memory stores program instructions that can be executed by the processor, and the processor calls the program instructions to execute the information-physical system architecture assessment method based on system element analysis as described in any one of claims 1-6.

10. An electronic device, characterized in that: include: A processor, a memory and a computer program; wherein the processor is connected to the memory, the computer program is stored in the memory, and when the electronic device is running, the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory so that the electronic device executes instructions for implementing the information-physical system architecture assessment method based on system element analysis as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images