Satellite system safety assessment method based on AHP grey theory and related device

Abstract

The invention discloses a satellite system safety assessment method based on an AHP grey theory and a related device, and belongs to the technical field of satellite information system safety. The method comprises the following steps: establishing a satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model; determining an evaluation index weight of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model through an analytic hierarchy process to obtain a weight vector of an evaluation index; an evaluation matrix is obtained through the satellite information system safety coefficient evaluation hierarchical structure model, and then a gray evaluation weight matrix R is obtained; and based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the gray evaluation weight matrix R, calculating to obtain the safety coefficient of the satellite system to be evaluated. According to the method, an evaluation framework and an index system of safety coefficient evaluation of the satellite information system are analyzed, the safety coefficient of the satellite information system is quantitatively calculated by applying mathematical means, the influence of human factors is reduced, the safety situation of the satellite information system is objectively reflected, and reference significance is provided for safety construction of the satellite information system.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of satellite information system security, and relates to a satellite system security assessment method and related devices based on AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) grey theory. Background Art

[0002] Satellite information systems have the characteristics of seamless global coverage, large communication capacity, and construction costs that are independent of communication distance. They are widely used in medical, disaster relief, aviation, national defense and other scenarios, and are an important part of the space-ground integration strategy. Due to the broadcast characteristics of the signal, the communication process of the satellite information system is vulnerable to the threat of eavesdroppers, resulting in severe security threats to the satellite communication system. Similar to traditional terrestrial communications, the secure transmission of satellite communications usually relies on cryptographic security mechanisms based on computational complexity.

[0003] However, with the improvement of eavesdroppers' computing power, cryptographic mechanisms have potential security loopholes, and relying solely on cryptographic mechanisms is difficult to meet the security requirements of satellite communication systems. The safety factor of satellite information systems is a comprehensive indicator with many random factors and fuzzy factors. Existing technologies are difficult to accurately and objectively calculate the safety factor of satellite information systems. Therefore, how to establish a standard, scientific, reasonable, and systematic satellite information system evaluation index system, use mathematical methods to calculate the safety factor of satellite information systems, and eliminate the influence of human factors is of great significance to the security construction of satellite information systems. Summary of the invention

[0004] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a satellite system safety assessment method and related devices based on AHP grey theory to solve the technical problem that the prior art lacks a systematic satellite information system assessment index system and is difficult to quantitatively calculate the safety factor of the satellite information system.

[0005] In order to achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions: In a first aspect, the present invention provides a satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory, comprising the following steps: Establish a hierarchical model for safety factor assessment of satellite information systems; The weights of the evaluation indexes of the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation are determined by analytic hierarchy process, and the weight vector of the evaluation indexes is obtained. The evaluation matrix is ​​obtained through the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation, and then the grey evaluation weight matrix R is obtained; Based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R, the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated is calculated.

[0006] Furthermore, the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model includes a target layer, a criterion layer and an indicator layer which are connected in sequence.

[0007] Furthermore, the step of determining the evaluation index weights of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical model by the hierarchical analysis method to obtain the weight vector of the evaluation index specifically includes: Using the paired comparison method, when the n elements of a certain layer in the hierarchical model of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation , … When it has an impact on a factor O in the upper layer, , … Take out two factors and , using the 1 to 9 scale method, Indicates the factor of first extraction and the factors for the second removal The influence ratio of factor O; all the results of the influence ratio are combined to form a pairwise comparison matrix J; the expression of the pairwise comparison matrix J is: J=

[0008] >0, =

[0009] in, Indication factors C 1 and C 1 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 1 and C 2 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 1 and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C 1 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C 2 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 andC n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C 1 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C 2 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Normalize each column vector of the pairwise comparison matrix J to obtain:

[0010] in, represents the normalized vector; right Taking the product of the rows and taking the nth power, we get:

[0011] in, Represents the normalized vector The result of taking the product of rows and taking the nth power; Will After normalization, we get:

[0012] in, represents the i-th weight vector; but = is the weight vector of the evaluation index.

[0013] Furthermore, after obtaining the weight vector of the evaluation index, a consistency check is performed, which specifically includes the following steps: Compute the largest eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J , the specific calculation formula is: =

[0014] in, represents the maximum eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J; represents the i-th weight vector; represents the weight vector; n The total number of elements in a certain level of the hierarchical model for satellite information system safety factor assessment; Take the largest eigenvalue , the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix J is tested, and the specific calculation formula is:

[0015] in, n The total number of elements in a certain level of the hierarchical model for satellite information system safety factor assessment; represents the maximum eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J; CI It represents the consistency index; The consistency index is corrected, and the specific calculation formula is:

[0016] in, RI is the correction factor; CR is the revised consistency index; when CR <0.1, the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix J meets the requirements.

[0017] Furthermore, the step of obtaining an evaluation matrix through the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical model and then obtaining a grey evaluation weight matrix R specifically includes: Set evaluation criteria and adopt expert scoring method to obtain quantitative scoring results of each evaluation index in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation; Assume that the evaluation criteria correspond to m indicator factors in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation, and the values ​​of the m indicator factors are recorded as u 1 ,u 2 ,…,u m , then the constituent factor set U={u 1 ,u 2 ,…,u m}; Divide the results of the evaluation criteria into q levels, denoted as v 1 , v 2 , …, v q , then the comment set V = {v 1 , v 2 , …, v q The relationship between the factor set and the comment set is represented by the evaluation matrix D, and the expression of the evaluation matrix D is: D=

[0018]

[0019] in, For comments vj About factors u i The whitening weight function of d 11 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the first comment; d 12 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the second comment; d 1q It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the qth comment; d 21 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the first comment; d 22 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the second comment; d 2q It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the qth comment; d m1 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the first comment; d m2 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the second comment; d mq It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the qth comment; d ij It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor in the j-th comment. The result is solved by function; For evaluation indicator i, d i represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor evaluation index under the comment set, r ij represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the i-th factor under the j-th comment, then:

[0020]

[0021] in, r ij It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the i-th factor under the j-th comment; d i It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the evaluation index of the ith factor under the comment set; d ij It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor in the j-th comment; R ij The grey evaluation weight matrix R is obtained by combining as follows:

[0022] Among them, R represents the grey evaluation weight matrix; r 11 It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the first comment; r 12 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the second comment; r 13 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the third comment; r 14 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the fourth comment; r 21 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the first comment; r 22 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the second comment; r 23 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the third comment; r 24 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the fourth comment; r m1 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the first comment; r m2 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the second comment; r m3 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the third comment; r m4 It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the fourth comment.

[0023] Furthermore, the step of calculating the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R specifically includes: The evaluation result B is calculated through the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R. The specific calculation formula is: B= ·R=(b 1 , b 2 , b 3 , b 4 ) in, = is the weight vector of the evaluation index; b 1 is the calculation result of the first evaluation index; b 2 is the calculation result of the second evaluation index; b 3 is the calculation result of the third evaluation index; b4 is the calculation result of the fourth evaluation indicator; Take a score for each level of the review set, corresponding to {100, 80, 60, 40}, and give a quantitative score to the evaluation criterion i, denoted as S i , the specific calculation formula is: S i = 100* b 1 +80* b 2 +60* b 3 +40* b 4 Among them, S i is the quantitative scoring result of evaluation criterion i; Finally, the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria is calculated as S = (S 1 , S 2 , …, S i ), the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated is calculated through the quantitative scoring results of the evaluation criteria.

[0024] Furthermore, the step of calculating the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated through the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria specifically includes: Obtain the weight vector c between the target layer and the criterion layer in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation 1 , c 2 , …, c k ), combined with the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria S = (S 1 , S 2 , …, S i ), calculate the safety factor A of the satellite system to be evaluated, the specific calculation formula is: A=c·S Among them, A represents the safety factor of the satellite system; c represents the weight vector between the target layer and the criterion layer; S represents the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criterion.

[0025] In a second aspect, the present invention provides a satellite system safety assessment system based on AHP grey theory, comprising: Model building module, used to establish a hierarchical model for safety factor assessment of satellite information systems; The weight vector calculation module is used to determine the evaluation index weights of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model through the hierarchical analysis method to obtain the weight vector of the evaluation index; Grey evaluation weight matrix calculation module, used to obtain the evaluation matrix through the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model, and then obtain the grey evaluation weight matrix R; The safety factor calculation module is used to calculate the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R.

[0026] In a third aspect, the present invention provides a computer device, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor implements the steps of the satellite system safety assessment method based on the AHP grey theory as described above when executing the computer program.

[0027] In a fourth aspect, the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the satellite system safety assessment method based on the AHP grey theory as described above.

[0028] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: The present invention discloses a satellite system security assessment method and related devices based on AHP grey theory. First, a hierarchical model of satellite information system safety factor assessment is established, and then the AHP grey theory is used to comprehensively assess the satellite information system safety factor. The present invention starts from the perspective of the satellite information system's security protection capability in the big data era, analyzes the assessment framework and index system of the satellite information system safety factor assessment, uses mathematical means to quantitatively calculate the satellite information system safety factor, reduces the impact of human factors, objectively reflects the security situation of the satellite information system, and has reference significance for the security construction of the satellite information system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0029] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings required for use in the embodiments are briefly introduced below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show certain embodiments of the present invention and therefore should not be regarded as limiting the scope. For ordinary technicians in this field, other related drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0030] Figure 1 is a flow chart of the method of the present invention; Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of the system of the present invention; Figure 3 A schematic diagram of a hierarchical structure model for safety factor evaluation of a satellite information system according to an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 4 Schematic diagram of the weights of safety factor assessment indicators for a satellite information system according to an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0031] The present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and in combination with embodiments. It should be noted that the embodiments and features in the embodiments of the present application can be combined with each other without conflict.

[0032] The following detailed description is an exemplary description, which is intended to provide further detailed description of the present invention. Unless otherwise specified, all technical terms used in the present invention have the same meaning as those generally understood by those skilled in the art to which the present application belongs. The terms used in the present invention are only for describing specific embodiments, and are not intended to limit exemplary embodiments according to the present invention.

[0033] See also Figure 1 The embodiment of the present invention discloses a satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory, which is characterized by comprising the following steps: S1, establish a hierarchical model for safety factor assessment of satellite information system; Since the satellite information system is a complex giant system, in addition to high-precision equipment, it also requires maintenance personnel to have strong capabilities and qualities. Therefore, the present invention establishes a hierarchical model for satellite information system safety factor evaluation based on the completeness, objectivity and scientificity of the index system principles by analyzing the actual role played by each element of the satellite information system. Figure 3 As shown, the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation includes a target layer, a criterion layer and an indicator layer connected in sequence. The target layer is the satellite information system; the criterion layer includes personnel quality, equipment status and working environment; the indicator layer includes political quality, professional quality, physical quality, psychological quality, space segment equipment, ground segment equipment, user segment equipment, communication network, electromagnetic environment, topography, warning facilities and climate conditions.

[0034] S2, determining the evaluation index weights of the hierarchical structure model of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation through the hierarchical analysis method, and obtaining the weight vector of the evaluation index; S201, the paired comparison method is a method of determining the order of advantages and disadvantages of these factors in certain aspects by comparing all possible combinations of several factors. The present invention adopts the paired comparison method. When n elements of a certain layer in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation are compared, the paired comparison method is used. , … When it has an impact on a factor O in the upper layer, , … Take out two factors and , using the 1 to 9 scale method, Indicates the factor of first extraction and the factors for the second removal The influence ratio of factor O; all the results of the influence ratio are combined to form a pairwise comparison matrix J; the expression of the pairwise comparison matrix J is: J= (1) >0, =

[0035] in, Indication factors C 1 and C 1 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 1 and C 2 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 1 and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C 1 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C 2 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C 1 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C 2 The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; S202, calculate the weight vector; the weight vector calculation problem of the hierarchical analysis method can be attributed to the calculation of the eigenvector and the maximum eigenroot of the matrix. However, it is very difficult to calculate the maximum eigenroot and eigenvector of the matrix, especially when the matrix divisor is high. Therefore, this paper uses the root method as an approximate method to calculate its eigenroot and eigenvector. The specific steps are as follows: 1) Normalize each column vector of the pairwise comparison matrix J to obtain: (2) in, represents the normalized vector; 2) Yes Taking the product of the rows and taking the nth power, we get: (3) in, Represents the normalized vector The result of taking the product of rows and taking the nth power; 3) After normalization, we get: (4) in, represents the i-th weight vector; but = is the weight vector of the evaluation index.

[0036] 4) After obtaining the weight vector of the evaluation index, a consistency check is performed. Usually, the pairwise comparison matrix is ​​not a consistent matrix, but in order to be able to use it to correspond to the characteristic root The characteristic vector of is used as the weight vector of the compared factors, and its inconsistency should be within the allowable range. Therefore, in order to improve the reliability of the weight vector, a consistency check is required.

[0037] Compute the largest eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J , the specific calculation formula is: = (5) in, represents the maximum eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J; represents the i-th weight vector; represents the weight vector; n The total number of elements in a certain layer of the hierarchical model for evaluating the safety factor of the satellite information system, i.e., the dimension of the matrix; Take the largest eigenvalue , the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix J is tested, and the specific calculation formula is: (6) in, n The total number of elements in a certain layer of the hierarchical model for evaluating the safety factor of the satellite information system, i.e., the dimension of the matrix; represents the maximum eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J; CI It represents the consistency index; When the matrix dimension is large, the consistency index needs to be corrected. The specific calculation formula is: (7) in, CR is the revised consistency index; RI is the correction factor. For different dimensions, the specific values ​​are shown in Table 1 below.

[0038] Table 1 Evaluation index scores

[0039] Normally, when CR <0.1, the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix J meets the requirements.

[0040] S3, the evaluation matrix is ​​obtained through the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation, and then the grey evaluation weight matrix R is obtained; S301, setting evaluation criteria and quantifying evaluation indicators; the process of quantifying evaluation indicators is the process of solving the indicator layer elements in the hierarchical structure, that is, obtaining the test result data of each evaluation indicator by various means. The present invention adopts the expert scoring method to quantify and score each safety indicator, and the score range is 0-10 points; finally, the quantitative scoring results of each evaluation indicator in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation are obtained.

[0041] S302, calculation of evaluation criteria; the calculation process of evaluation criteria is a mapping process from a multidimensional space to a point in a line segment or a level in an evaluation domain. First, determine the evaluation matrix; Assume that the evaluation criteria correspond to m indicator factors in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation, and the values ​​of the m indicator factors are recorded as u 1 ,u 2 ,…,u m , then they form a finite set. Let it be factor set U={u 1 ,u 2 ,…,u m}; Divide the results of the evaluation criteria into q levels, denoted as v 1 , v 2 , …, v q , then a finite set of comments is formed, denoted as the comment set V = {v 1 , v2 , …, v q The relationship between the factor set and the comment set is represented by the evaluation matrix D, and the expression of the evaluation matrix D is: D= (8) (9) in, For comments v j About factors u i The whitening weight function of d 11 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the first comment; d 12 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the second comment; d 1q It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the qth comment; d 21 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the first comment; d 22 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the second comment; d 2q It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the qth comment; d m1 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the first comment; d m2 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the second comment; d mq It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the qth comment; d ij It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor in the j-th comment. The result is solved by function; Therefore, in this embodiment, according to the quantitative scoring results of each evaluation index, the scoring level of the evaluation criteria is divided into four levels, using the comment set V ={excellent, good, medium, poor}, and use the whitening weight function To describe, the whitening weight function is divided into 4 sections, and the specific form is as follows: excellent:

[0042] good:

[0043] middle:

[0044] Difference: (10) Among them, a represents the expected value of the excellent grade; b represents the expected value of the good grade; c represents the expected value of the medium grade; d represents the expected value of the poor grade; x represents the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation index; Indicates that the rating is excellent; Indicates that the rating is good; Indicates that the rating level is medium; Indicates that the scoring level is poor; in this embodiment, according to the system framework and working mechanism of the satellite system, it is assumed that a=3, b=5, c=7, and d=9.

[0045] S303, calculate the grey evaluation weight matrix; for evaluation index i, d i represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor evaluation index under the comment set, r ij represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the i-th factor under the j-th comment, then: (11) (12) in, r ij It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the i-th factor under the j-th comment; d i It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the evaluation index of the ith factor under the comment set; d ij It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor in the j-th comment; R ij The grey evaluation weight matrix R is obtained by combining as follows: (13) Among them, R represents the grey evaluation weight matrix; r 11 It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the first comment; r 12 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the second comment; r 13 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the third comment; r 14 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the fourth comment; r 21 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the first comment; r 22It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the second comment; r 23 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the third comment; r 24 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the fourth comment; r m1 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the first comment; r m2 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the second comment; r m3 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the third comment; r m4 It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the fourth comment.

[0046] S4, based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R, the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated is calculated.

[0047] S401, calculate the evaluation result B through the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R. The specific calculation formula is: B= ·R=(b 1 , b 2 , b 3 , b 4 )(14) in, = is the weight vector of the evaluation index; b 1 is the calculation result of the first evaluation index; b 2 is the calculation result of the second evaluation index; b 3 is the calculation result of the third evaluation index; b 4 is the calculation result of the fourth evaluation indicator; S402, in order to quantitatively calculate the evaluation index of the criterion layer, it is necessary to take a score for each level of the comment set, corresponding to {100, 80, 60, 40}, and quantitatively score the evaluation criterion i, denoted as S i , the specific calculation formula is: S i = 100* b 1 +80* b 2 +60* b 3 +40* b 4 (15) Among them, S i is the quantitative scoring result of evaluation criterion i; S403, finally calculate and obtain the quantitative scoring result S of the evaluation criteria = (S 1 , S 2 , …, S i ), the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated is calculated through the quantitative scoring results of the evaluation criteria. Specifically including: Obtain the weight vector c between the target layer and the criterion layer in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation 1 , c 2 , …, c k ), combined with the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria S = (S 1 , S 2 , …, S i ), calculate the safety factor A of the satellite system to be evaluated, the specific calculation formula is: A=c·S (16) Among them, A represents the safety factor of the satellite system; c represents the weight vector between the target layer and the criterion layer; S represents the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criterion.

[0048] The embodiment of the present invention adopts the grey theory to evaluate the safety factor of satellite information system in the process of safety factor evaluation, which is characterized by small data, certain extension and uncertain connotation. Grey theory is proposed for the uncertainty of small samples and poor information, that is, the problem of "little data uncertainty" where "partial information is known and part of it is unknown". Its biggest feature is that it has no strict requirements on the sample size, does not require it to obey any distribution, and the operation is simple and convenient. However, this method has two shortcomings: (1) There is no objective evaluation index system for the evaluation object; (2) There is no solution for the target weights of each evaluation indicator.

[0049] The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) refers to a method of decomposing the relevant elements of a problem into levels such as goals, criteria, and solutions, and analyzing them on this basis. The present invention combines the analytic hierarchy process with the grey evaluation method to form a grey evaluation model based on AHP. AHP is used to reasonably determine the hierarchical structure and indicator weights of the evaluation object, and the quantification of the indicators is achieved by using grey theory. The analytic hierarchy process and the grey evaluation method each have their own advantages. They are an effective comprehensive evaluation method that conducts quantitative processing on the basis of qualitative analysis and makes scientific evaluations of the evaluation objects. Based on this, the present invention conducts a scientific analysis of the security protection capability of the satellite information system, establishes a satellite information system safety factor evaluation model, uses mathematical means to quantitatively calculate the satellite information system safety factor, comprehensively analyzes the safety characteristics of the satellite information system, and controls harmful factors that affect the safety of the satellite information system.

[0050] See also Figure 2The embodiment of the present invention discloses a satellite system safety assessment system based on AHP grey theory, including a model building module, a weight vector calculation module, a grey evaluation weight matrix calculation module and a safety factor calculation module.

[0051] Among them, the model building module is used to establish a hierarchical model for the safety factor evaluation of the satellite information system; the weight vector calculation module is used to determine the evaluation index weights of the hierarchical model for the safety factor evaluation of the satellite information system through the hierarchical analysis method, and obtain the weight vector of the evaluation index; the grey evaluation weight matrix calculation module is used to obtain the evaluation matrix through the hierarchical model for the safety factor evaluation of the satellite information system, and then obtain the grey evaluation weight matrix R; the safety factor calculation module is used to calculate the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R.

[0052] Example: This embodiment takes the construction of a satellite system of a certain unit as an example to illustrate the role of the above-mentioned satellite system safety assessment method based on AHP grey theory in the safety factor assessment of satellite information systems.

[0053] Assume that during the trial operation phase of a satellite system in a certain unit, the technical support force is relatively weak, and some support personnel are not familiar with the overall structure of the satellite system and the operation methods of the ground station equipment, and have a certain fear; the precise timing module of the ground operation control system sometimes fails, resulting in service interruption; the data information uploaded to the satellite by the operation control segment sometimes appears garbled, which has an adverse impact on the service performance of the satellite system; the towering trees around the satellite station affect the communication between the receiver and the satellite, resulting in a decrease in the quality of signal reception. With the help of hierarchical analysis, the weights of the evaluation indicators are determined as follows: Figure 4 As shown: According to the expert scoring method, the scores of various safety factor evaluation indicators are shown in Table 2.

[0054] Table 2 Evaluation index scores

[0055] According to the scoring value of personnel quality and formula (13), the grey evaluation matrix is ​​obtained:

[0056] Substitute the above results into formula (14) to calculate the evaluation criterion vector: B 1 =(0.528, 0, 0.2955, 0.1765) According to formula (15), calculate the personnel quality score S 1 =77.59.

[0057] Similarly, calculate the score S of the device status2 =76.72, score of working environment S 3 =83.51.

[0058] According to formula (16), the safety factor of the satellite information system is A=79.03.

[0059] In order to improve the security protection capability of the satellite information system, the unit conducted intensive training for all technical support personnel, so that each technical support personnel understands the working principle of the satellite information system and masters the operation methods of related equipment; repairs the precise timekeeping module of the ground operation control system to keep it in good working condition; repairs the bug of garbled data information uploaded to the satellite by the operation control segment to enhance the stability of the satellite system; moves the towering trees around the satellite station to other places to improve the communication quality between the receiver and the satellite. The re-evaluation was carried out according to the above method, and the indicator weights remained unchanged. The quantitative values ​​of various security assessment indicators are shown in Table 3.

[0060] Table 3 Quantitative values ​​of evaluation indicators

[0061] After calculation, the score S of personnel quality is obtained 1 =91.75, the score of the equipment status S 2 =86.18, score of working environment S 3 =96.67, the satellite information system safety factor A=91.32. It can be seen that the above scheme can improve the security protection capability of the satellite information system.

[0062] In one embodiment of the present invention, a computer device is provided, the computer device comprising a processor and a memory, the memory being used to store a computer program, the computer program comprising program instructions, and the processor being used to execute the program instructions stored in the computer storage medium. The processor may be a central processing unit (CPU), or may be other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors (DSP), application-specific integrated circuits (ASIC), field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA) or other programmable logic devices, discrete gates or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components, etc. It is the computing core and control core of the terminal, which is suitable for implementing one or more instructions, and is specifically suitable for loading and executing one or more instructions in a computer storage medium to implement a corresponding method flow or corresponding function; the processor described in the embodiment of the present invention can be used for the operation of the method for optimizing the reactive power of a traction power supply system.

[0063] The present invention also provides a storage medium, specifically a computer-readable storage medium (Memory), which is a memory device in a computer device for storing programs and data. It is understandable that the computer-readable storage medium here can include both built-in storage media in the computer device and, of course, extended storage media supported by the computer device. The computer-readable storage medium provides a storage space, which stores the operating system of the terminal. In addition, one or more instructions suitable for being loaded and executed by the processor are also stored in the storage space, and these instructions can be one or more computer programs (including program codes). It should be noted that the computer-readable storage medium here can be a high-speed RAM (Random Access Memory) or a non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk storage. The processor can load and execute one or more instructions stored in the computer-readable storage medium to implement the corresponding steps of the method for optimizing the reactive power of the traction power supply system in the above embodiment.

[0064] It should be understood by those skilled in the art that the 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 aspects. 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 (Compact Disc Read-Only Memory), optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0065] 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.

[0066] 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.

[0067] These computer program instructions can also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing device so that a series of operating steps are executed on the computer or other programmable device to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing instructions 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.

[0068] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention rather than to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the above embodiments, ordinary technicians in the relevant field should understand that the specific implementation methods of the present invention can still be modified or replaced by equivalents. Any modification or equivalent replacement that does not depart from the spirit and scope of the present invention should be covered within the scope of protection of the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. Satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory, characterized by: The following steps are involved: Establish a hierarchical model for safety factor assessment of satellite information systems; The weights of the evaluation indexes of the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation are determined by analytic hierarchy process, and the weight vector of the evaluation indexes is obtained. The evaluation matrix is ​​obtained through the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation, and then the grey evaluation weight matrix R is obtained; Based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R, the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated is calculated.

2. The satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model comprises a target layer, a criterion layer and an indicator layer which are connected in sequence.

3. The satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The step of determining the evaluation index weights of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model by using the hierarchical analysis method to obtain the weight vector of the evaluation index specifically includes: Using the paired comparison method, when the n elements of a certain layer in the hierarchical model of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation , … When it has an impact on a factor O in the upper layer, , … Take out two factors and , using the 1 to 9 scale method, Indicates the factor of first extraction and the factors for the second removal The influence ratio of factor O; all the results of the influence ratio are combined to form a pairwise comparison matrix J; the expression of the pairwise comparison matrix J is: J= >0, = in, Indication factors C 1 and C The ratio of the effect of 1 to factor O; Indication factors C 1 and C 2 to the ratio of the effect of factor O; Indication factors C 1 and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C The ratio of the effect of 1 to factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C 2 to the ratio of the effect of factor O; Indication factors C 2 and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Indication factors C n and C The ratio of the effect of 1 to factor O; Indication factors C n and C 2 to the ratio of the effect of factor O; Indication factors C n and C n The ratio of the influence on factor O; Normalize each column vector of the pairwise comparison matrix J to obtain: in, represents the normalized vector; right Taking the product of the rows and taking the nth power, we get: in, Represents the normalized vector The result of taking the product of rows and taking the nth power; Will After normalization, we get: in, represents the i-th weight vector; but = is the weight vector of the evaluation index.

4. The satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory according to claim 3 is characterized in that: After obtaining the weight vector of the evaluation index, a consistency check is performed, which specifically includes the following steps: Compute the largest eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J , the specific calculation formula is: = in, represents the maximum eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J; represents the i-th weight vector; represents the weight vector; n The total number of elements in a certain level of the hierarchical model for satellite information system safety factor assessment; Take the largest eigenvalue , the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix J is tested, and the specific calculation formula is: in, n The total number of elements in a certain level of the hierarchical model for satellite information system safety factor assessment; represents the maximum eigenvalue of the pairwise comparison matrix J; CI It represents the consistency index; The consistency index is corrected, and the specific calculation formula is: in, RI is the correction factor; CR is the revised consistency index; when CR <0.1, the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix J meets the requirements.

5. The satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The step of obtaining an evaluation matrix through a satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model and then obtaining a grey evaluation weight matrix R specifically includes: Set evaluation criteria and adopt expert scoring method to obtain quantitative scoring results of each evaluation index in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation; Assume that the evaluation criteria correspond to m indicator factors in the hierarchical structure model of satellite information system safety factor evaluation, and the values ​​of the m indicator factors are recorded as u1, u2, ..., u m , then the set of constituent factors U={u1,u2,…,u m }; Divide the results of the evaluation criteria into q levels, denoted as v1, v2, …, v q , then the comment set V = {v1, v2, ..., v q The relationship between the factor set and the comment set is represented by the evaluation matrix D, and the expression of the evaluation matrix D is: D= in, For comments v j About factors u i The whitening weight function of d 11 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the first comment; d 12 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the second comment; d 1q It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the first factor in the qth comment; d 21 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the first comment; d 22 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the second comment; d 2q It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the second factor in the qth comment; d m1 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the first comment; d m2 It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the second comment; d mq It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the mth factor in the qth comment; d ij It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor in the j-th comment. The result is solved by function; For evaluation indicator i, d i represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor evaluation index under the comment set, r ij represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the i-th factor under the j-th comment, then: in, r ij It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the i-th factor under the j-th comment; d i It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the evaluation index of the ith factor under the comment set; d ij It represents the total grey evaluation coefficient of the i-th factor in the j-th comment; R ij The grey evaluation weight matrix R is obtained by combining as follows: Among them, R represents the grey evaluation weight matrix; r 11 It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the first comment; r 12 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the second comment; r 13 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the third comment; r 14 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the first factor under the fourth comment; r 21 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the first comment; r 22 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the second comment; r 23 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the third comment; r 24 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the second factor under the fourth comment; r m1 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the first comment; r m2 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the second comment; r m3 It represents the gray evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the third comment; r m4 It represents the grey evaluation weight of the evaluation index of the mth factor under the fourth comment.

6. The satellite system security assessment method based on AHP grey theory according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The step of calculating the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R specifically includes: The evaluation result B is calculated through the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R. The specific calculation formula is: B= ·R=(b1,b2,b3,b4) in, = is the weight vector of the evaluation index; b1 is the calculation result of the first evaluation index; b2 is the calculation result of the second evaluation index; b3 is the calculation result of the third evaluation index; b4 is the calculation result of the fourth evaluation index; Take a score for each level of the review set, corresponding to {100, 80, 60, 40}, and give a quantitative score to the evaluation criterion i, denoted as S i , the specific calculation formula is: S i = 100* b1+80* b2+60* b3+40* b4 Among them, S i is the quantitative scoring result of evaluation criterion i; Finally, the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria is calculated as S = (S1, S2, ..., S i ), the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated is calculated through the quantitative scoring results of the evaluation criteria.

7. The satellite system safety assessment method based on AHP grey theory according to claim 6 is characterized in that: The step of calculating the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated through the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria specifically includes: Obtain the weight vector c=(c1, c2, …, c k ), combined with the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criteria S = (S1, S2, ..., S i ), calculate the safety factor A of the satellite system to be evaluated, the specific calculation formula is: A=c·S Among them, A represents the safety factor of the satellite system; c represents the weight vector between the target layer and the criterion layer; S represents the quantitative scoring result of the evaluation criterion.

8. Satellite system safety assessment system based on AHP grey theory, characterized by: include: Model building module, used to establish a hierarchical model for safety factor assessment of satellite information systems; The weight vector calculation module is used to determine the evaluation index weights of the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model through the hierarchical analysis method to obtain the weight vector of the evaluation index; Grey evaluation weight matrix calculation module, used to obtain the evaluation matrix through the satellite information system safety factor evaluation hierarchical structure model, and then obtain the grey evaluation weight matrix R; The safety factor calculation module is used to calculate the safety factor of the satellite system to be evaluated based on the weight vector of the evaluation index and the grey evaluation weight matrix R.

9. A computer device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, characterized in that: When the processor executes the computer program, the steps of the satellite system safety assessment method based on the AHP grey theory are implemented as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, characterized in that: When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the satellite system safety assessment method based on AHP grey theory are implemented as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images