Demand-based test design and evaluation integration method

Abstract

The invention discloses a demand-based test design and evaluation integration method, and belongs to the technical field of test schemes. The method comprises the following steps: acquiring a combat mission set and a combat capability set of each piece of equipment to determine the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment in the combat capability set; forming an assessment index system of a combat mission set by utilizing the ability increasing demand, the troop use demand and the importance level of the combat ability of each device; performing test variable control design by utilizing the assessment index system to form a test project scheme; performing test project simulation according to the test project scheme to obtain a simulation result of each combat capability index of each device; and carrying out combat demand satisfaction degree integration by utilizing each combat capability index simulation result so as to evaluate and demonstrate a test project scheme. According to the method, the battle demand satisfaction degree can be represented, so that each piece of equipment can meet the capability increasing demand and the troop use demand.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of experimental schemes, and in particular relates to an integrated method of experimental design and evaluation based on demand. Background Art

[0002] At present, the commonly used combat test design and evaluation methods are mainly based on the reductionist thinking of indicator data aggregation. Through the combat process and information process of weapons and equipment, in one or more scenarios, the fragmented equipment design indicators are connected in series, and multiple design indicators are assessed in a scenario-based manner. Based on the indicator capability aggregation method, a combat test evaluation indicator system is formed. The data collected from the combat test is weighted and aggregated from the bottom up using the subjective / objective weight allocation method to finally complete the evaluation of the combat test. The main steps are as follows: Regarding operational test design, the equipment design indicators to be assessed are first sorted out to form an indicator set. Different test scenarios are then set up. Based on operational processes and information flows, the indicators to be assessed are mapped one by one into the assessment scenarios. Finally, a comprehensive consideration of factors such as force deployment, environmental configuration, and data collection is used to form an operational test design plan. Regarding operational test evaluation, a combat test evaluation indicator system is first constructed. Then, based on subjective or objective weighting methods such as AHP and entropy weighting, the weights of indicators at each level are determined. Finally, based on the hierarchical relationships of the indicator system, the combat effectiveness indicator values ​​are weighted and aggregated from the bottom up according to the determined weights to obtain the combat effectiveness value, which is then used to conduct analysis and evaluation. However, this method does not guide operational test design from the perspective of operational requirements, making it difficult to characterize the degree to which operational requirements are met. It also fails to fully consider key operational issues, resulting in gaps in equipment meeting troop needs and resolving practical challenges. Summary of the Invention

[0003] One of the purposes of the present invention is to provide an integrated test design and evaluation method based on demand, which can characterize the degree to which combat requirements are met so that each piece of equipment can meet the requirements of capability growth and troop use.

[0004] A second object of the present invention is to provide an integrated system for test design and evaluation based on demand.

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

[0006] A needs-based integrated experimental design and evaluation method, the integrated experimental design and evaluation method comprising:

[0007] Step S1: Obtain the combat mission set and combat capability set of each equipment to determine the importance level of the combat capability of each equipment in the combat capability set;

[0008] Step S2: using the capability growth requirements, the troop utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment to form an assessment indicator system for the combat mission set;

[0009] Step S3: using the assessment index system to conduct experimental variable control design to form an experimental project plan;

[0010] Step S4: Perform test project simulation according to the test project plan to obtain simulation results of various combat capability indicators of each equipment;

[0011] Step S5: Using the simulation results of the various combat capability indicators, conduct a comprehensive assessment of combat requirement satisfaction to evaluate and demonstrate the pilot project plan.

[0012] Furthermore, in step S1, the specific process of determining the importance level of each combat capability in the combat capability set includes:

[0013] Step S11, determining the importance weight of each combat task in the combat task set;

[0014] Step S12: determining a conversion value between each combat task in the combat task set and each combat capability in the combat capability set, so as to construct a conversion mapping matrix between combat tasks and combat capabilities;

[0015] Step S13: Calculate the importance level of each combat capability using the importance weights of each combat mission and the conversion mapping matrix.

[0016] Furthermore, the specific implementation process of step S2 includes:

[0017] Step S21: Decompose each combat mission using the capability growth requirements, the force utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment to determine the key combat issues corresponding to each combat mission.

[0018] Step S22: performing tree decomposition on the key operational issues corresponding to each operational mission to obtain performance indicators corresponding to each evaluation indicator;

[0019] In the step S22, the evaluation index includes an effectiveness index and an applicability index;

[0020] Step S23: Obtain the data elements required for each performance indicator and form a hierarchical indicator system;

[0021] Step S24: screening, merging and simplifying the hierarchical indicator system in sequence to obtain the assessment indicator system of the combat mission set.

[0022] Furthermore, in step S5, the specific process of integrating operational demand satisfaction includes:

[0023] Step S51: Determine each combat capability index value according to each combat capability parameter category of each equipment to calculate the weight of each combat capability index in each combat function;

[0024] Step S52: Calculate the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function using the simulation results of each combat capability indicator of each equipment;

[0025] Step S53: Using the weights of the combat capability indicators in each combat function, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction scores of the combat capability indicators in each combat function to obtain the satisfaction scores of each combat function in each action capability.

[0026] Step S54: Determine each combat function value according to each combat function parameter category in each action capability to calculate each combat function weight in each action capability;

[0027] Step S55: Using the weights of the various combat functions in each action capability, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction of each combat function in each action capability to obtain the satisfaction of each action capability in the mission task;

[0028] Step S56: Determine each action capability value according to each action capability parameter category in the mission task to calculate each action capability weight in the mission task;

[0029] Step S57: Using the weights of the various action capabilities in the mission task, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction of each action capability in the mission task to obtain the mission task satisfaction of each equipment.

[0030] Furthermore, in step S51, the weights of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function are:

[0031]

[0032] Among them, r k and μ k are the kth combat capability indicator weight and the kth combat capability indicator value in each combat function, respectively, k = 1, 2,…, K, K is the number of combat capability indicators in each combat function.

[0033] Further, in the step S52, the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in the combat function is;

[0034]

[0035] Among them, C k and a k are the kth combat capability indicator satisfaction and kth combat capability indicator simulation results in each combat function; h k , h′ k and h″ k are the ideal demand satisfaction threshold, basic demand satisfaction threshold, and minimum demand satisfaction threshold corresponding to the kth combat capability indicator in each combat function;

[0036] In step S53, the satisfaction level of each combat function in each action capability is:

[0037]

[0038] Among them, C j is the jth combat function satisfaction in each action capability.

[0039] In order to achieve the second of the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0040] A demand-based integrated experimental design and evaluation system, comprising:

[0041] An acquisition module, configured to acquire a combat mission set and a combat capability set of each piece of equipment to determine an importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment in the combat capability set;

[0042] Forming a module for forming an assessment indicator system for the combat mission set using capability growth requirements and force utilization requirements as well as the importance level of the combat capability of each equipment;

[0043] An experimental variable control design module is used to perform experimental variable control design using the assessment index system to form an experimental project plan;

[0044] A test project simulation module is used to perform test project simulation according to the test project plan to obtain simulation results of various combat capability indicators of each equipment;

[0045] The operational requirement satisfaction comprehensive module is used to use the importance level of the operational capability of each equipment and the simulation results of each operational capability indicator to conduct an operational requirement satisfaction comprehensive evaluation to evaluate and verify the test project plan.

[0046] Furthermore, the acquisition module includes:

[0047] A first determining submodule is used to determine the importance weight of each combat task in the combat task set;

[0048] A second determination submodule is configured to determine a conversion value between each combat task in the combat task set and each combat capability in the combat capability set, so as to construct a conversion mapping matrix between combat tasks and combat capabilities;

[0049] The first calculation submodule is used to calculate the importance level of each combat capability by using the importance weight of each combat task and the conversion mapping matrix.

[0050] Furthermore, the forming module includes:

[0051] A problem decomposition submodule is used to decompose each combat mission using capability growth requirements, force utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capabilities of each piece of equipment to determine the key combat issues corresponding to each combat mission;

[0052] A tree decomposition submodule is used to perform tree decomposition on the key operational issues corresponding to each operational mission to obtain performance indicators corresponding to each evaluation indicator;

[0053] Wherein, the evaluation indicators include effectiveness indicators and applicability indicators;

[0054] The acquisition submodule is used to obtain the data elements required for each performance indicator and form a hierarchical indicator system;

[0055] The processing submodule is used to screen, merge and simplify the hierarchical indicator system in turn to obtain the assessment indicator system of the combat mission set.

[0056] Furthermore, the operational demand satisfaction comprehensive module includes:

[0057] The second calculation submodule is used to determine each combat capability index value according to each combat capability parameter category of each equipment to calculate the weight of each combat capability index in each combat function;

[0058] A third calculation submodule is configured to calculate the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function by using the simulation results of each combat capability indicator of each equipment;

[0059] A first weighted comprehensive processing submodule is configured to perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction scores of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function using the weights of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function to obtain the satisfaction scores of each combat function in each action capability;

[0060] a fourth calculation submodule, for determining each combat function value according to each combat function parameter category in each action capability, so as to calculate each combat function weight in each action capability;

[0061] A second weighted comprehensive processing submodule is configured to perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction level of each combat function in each action capability using the weight of each combat function in each action capability to obtain the satisfaction level of each action capability in the mission task;

[0062] a fifth calculation submodule, for determining each action capability value according to each action capability parameter category in the mission task, so as to calculate each action capability weight in the mission task;

[0063] The third weighted comprehensive processing submodule is used to use the weights of each action capability in the mission task to perform weighted comprehensive processing on each action capability satisfaction in the mission task to obtain the mission task satisfaction of each equipment.

[0064] In summary, the technical solution of the present invention has the following technical effects:

[0065] The equipment combat test of the present invention emphasizes "integration into the system and highlighting confrontation", takes combat needs as the fundamental driving force, sets assessment items and contents according to the equipment combat mission and actual combat requirements, highlights the assessment and evaluation of equipment combat effectiveness and applicability, and changes "combat technical index conformity comparison" to "combat demand conformity comparison". Whether the combat needs are met is the primary standard requirement for whether the combat test passes or not, which ensures that the combat test design is driven by the combat demand level, meets the combat needs, and improves the scientificity and rationality of the combat test design; the present invention fully considers the need to solve key combat problems, so that the equipment can meet the needs of the troops and solve the gap between practical difficult problems, so that each equipment can meet the needs of capability growth and the needs of troops, and ensures that the evaluation results are more focused on actual combat applications and closer to the needs of the troops. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0066] In order to more clearly illustrate the specific embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the specific embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying any creative work.

[0067] Figure 1 Schematic diagram of the process of the integrated method of experimental design and evaluation based on (operational) requirements of the present invention;

[0068] Figure 2 This is a tree-like decomposition diagram of the key combat problems in this embodiment;

[0069] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of operational requirement satisfaction in this embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0070] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention more clear, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings of the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative efforts shall fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0071] This example provides a demand-based integrated test design and evaluation method. Figure 1 , this integrated approach to trial design and evaluation includes:

[0072] Step S1: Obtain the combat mission set and combat capability set of each equipment to determine the importance level of the combat capability of each equipment in the combat capability set.

[0073] According to the typical combat concept (OV-1), the combat organization of the subordinate forces is analyzed, including the composition of combat nodes and the organization of forces. The mission situation, command relationship, and communication relationship in each combat node are analyzed. The combat actions of the combat system are analyzed and sorted out to form the combat mission set M = {M1, M2, ..., M n}.

[0074] In this embodiment, the various parameters of the equipment include combat capability parameters, combat function parameters, and operational capability parameters. Each parameter category includes signature parameters, key parameters, and general parameters. Signature parameters are the capability requirements necessary for the equipment to complete its core mission, and have the highest weights, indicated by the symbol ★. Key parameters are the capability requirements necessary for the equipment to complete its primary mission, and have higher weights, indicated by the symbol ☆. General parameters are the capability requirements necessary for the equipment to complete its non-primary missions, and have lower weights, indicated by the symbol ○. Signature capabilities are assigned the highest weights; key capabilities are assigned the highest weights; and general capabilities are assigned the lowest weights.

[0075] This embodiment converts the importance of each combat mission into the importance of each combat capability by converting the mapping matrix.

[0076] In this embodiment, the specific process of determining the importance level of each combat capability in the combat capability set includes:

[0077] Step S11, determining the importance weight of each combat task in the combat task set;

[0078] Step S12: determining a conversion value between each combat task in the combat task set and each combat capability in the combat capability set, so as to construct a conversion mapping matrix between combat tasks and combat capabilities;

[0079] The conversion mapping matrix between combat missions and combat capabilities in this embodiment is:

[0080]

[0081] Where X is the conversion mapping matrix between combat missions and combat capabilities; f ij is the conversion value between the i-th combat mission and the j-th combat capability, i = 1, 2, ..., m, j = 1, 2, ..., n, m and n are the number of combat missions and the number of combat capabilities, respectively.

[0082] Step S13: Calculate the importance level of each combat capability using the importance weights of each combat mission and the conversion mapping matrix.

[0083] The importance levels of each combat capability in this embodiment are:

[0084]

[0085] Among them, RI j is the importance level of the jth combat capability; w i is the importance weight of the i-th combat mission.

[0086] Step S2: Utilize the capability growth requirements, the troop usage requirements, and the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment to form an assessment indicator system for the combat mission set.

[0087] The sources of key operational issues mainly include capability growth requirements and force utilization requirements (i.e., force utilization issues), such as whether a destroyer can provide effective air defense cover for the mother ship within its responsible air defense area. This embodiment adopts a tree-like decomposition method to restore high-level to low-level, using parts to explain the whole, and gradually transitioning from abstract levels to specific details. That is, key operational issues are gradually decomposed to the extent that actual data requirements and test measurements can be determined. From high to low levels, they are mapped to key operational issues, test objectives, evaluation indicators (including effectiveness indicators and applicability indicators), performance indicators, and data elements, respectively, to obtain hierarchical indicators. Figure 2 .

[0088] A hierarchical indicator system is constructed based on the hierarchical indicators derived from the decomposition of key operational issues. Core capability requirements are proposed to address capability growth points and troop utilization issues. Tactical and technical indicators are broken down and refined, and these indicators are categorized into three categories: landmark, critical, and general. Top-level indicators related to mission tasks and having a significant impact on core operational capabilities are generally designated as landmark indicators; indicators that significantly drive technological development and provide significant support for achieving landmark indicators are generally designated as critical indicators; and the remaining indicators are designated as general indicators. Furthermore, the indicator system for use in complex electromagnetic, meteorological, and geographic environments, as well as organizational constraints on their application, are refined.

[0089] The hierarchical indicator system is simplified by merging identical indicators and deleting general indicators with high security risks and high assessment difficulty to form an assessment indicator system.

[0090] In summary, the specific implementation process of this step includes:

[0091] Step S21: Decompose each combat mission using the capability growth requirements, the force utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment to determine the key combat issues corresponding to each combat mission.

[0092] Step S22: performing tree decomposition on the key operational issues corresponding to each operational mission to obtain performance indicators corresponding to each evaluation indicator;

[0093] In the step S22, the evaluation index includes an effectiveness index and an applicability index;

[0094] Step S23: Obtain the data elements required for each performance indicator and form a hierarchical indicator system;

[0095] Step S24: screening, merging and simplifying the hierarchical indicator system in sequence to obtain the assessment indicator system of the combat mission set.

[0096] Step S3: Using the assessment index system, perform experimental variable control design to form an experimental project plan.

[0097] The design of each test project plan in this embodiment is to use the combat simulation system to simulate the combat process of the equipment and its system under different combat scenarios, environmental conditions, and combat styles, sort out the test dependent variables, independent variables and control variables and their influence relationships, establish a complex network relationship between various factor variables, and complete the test variable control design plan, where each horizontal combination is a test project plan.

[0098] Step S4: Perform test project simulation according to the test project plan to obtain simulation results of various combat capability indicators of each equipment.

[0099] Step S5: Using the simulation results of the various combat capability indicators, conduct a comprehensive assessment of combat requirement satisfaction to evaluate and demonstrate the pilot project plan.

[0100] The evaluation criteria for combat tests are completely different from those for performance tests. Conformity benchmarking of combat technical indicators is no longer possible. The ultimate goal of combat tests is to answer the degree to which equipment meets combat requirements. Therefore, the concept of combat requirement satisfaction is introduced. When conducting comprehensive demonstration of research and development project establishment or comprehensive demonstration of overall research and development requirements, the equipment combat requirements are divided into ideal requirements, basic requirements and minimum requirements. The difference between the indicator parameter results obtained from the test and the corresponding requirement values ​​is the basic basis for measurement.

[0101] When the test results meet the ideal requirements, the satisfaction value is 1; when they meet the basic requirements, the satisfaction value is 0.8; when they only meet the minimum requirements, the satisfaction value is 0.6. When the test results are a value between the ideal requirements, basic requirements, and minimum requirements, the satisfaction value is calculated using numerical interpolation.

[0102] Operational requirement satisfaction includes mission satisfaction, operational capability satisfaction, operational function satisfaction, and operational capability indicator satisfaction (i.e., capability parameter satisfaction). The evaluation indicator system is generated from top to bottom, first mapping mission satisfaction to operational capability satisfaction, then mapping operational capability satisfaction to operational function satisfaction, and finally mapping operational function satisfaction to operational capability indicator satisfaction (i.e., capability parameter satisfaction).

[0103] In summary, the specific process of operational requirement satisfaction synthesis in this embodiment includes:

[0104] Step S51: Determine each combat capability index value according to each combat capability parameter category of each equipment to calculate each combat capability index weight in each combat function.

[0105] In this embodiment, the weights of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function are:

[0106]

[0107] Among them, r k and μ k are the kth combat capability indicator weight and the kth combat capability indicator value in each combat function, respectively, k = 1, 2,…, K, K is the number of combat capability indicators in each combat function.

[0108] When the kth combat capability parameter category is a landmark parameter, the kth combat capability index value μ kis A1; when the kth combat capability parameter category is a key parameter, the kth combat capability index value μ k is B1; when the kth combat capability parameter category is a general parameter, the kth combat capability index value μ k C1, B1 is less than A1, and B1 is greater than C1.

[0109] Step S52: Calculate the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function using the simulation results of each combat capability indicator of each equipment.

[0110] In this embodiment, the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function is:

[0111]

[0112] Among them, C k and a k are the kth combat capability indicator satisfaction and the kth combat capability indicator simulation results (i.e., the test data) in each combat function; h k , h′ k and h″ k are the ideal demand satisfaction threshold, basic demand satisfaction threshold and minimum demand satisfaction threshold corresponding to the kth combat capability indicator in each combat function.

[0113] Step S53: Using the weights of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction levels of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function to obtain the satisfaction levels of each combat function in each action capability.

[0114] In this embodiment, the satisfaction level of each combat function in each action capability is:

[0115]

[0116] Among them, C j is the jth combat function satisfaction in each action capability.

[0117] Step S54: Determine each combat function value according to each combat function parameter category in each action capability to calculate each combat function weight in each action capability.

[0118] When the j-th combat function parameter category is a landmark parameter, the j-th combat function value is A2; when the j-th combat function parameter category is a key parameter, the j-th combat function index value is B2; when the j-th combat function parameter category is a general parameter, the j-th combat function index value is C2, B2 is less than A2, and B2 is greater than C2.

[0119] Step S55: Using the weights of the various combat functions in each action capability, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction of each combat function in each action capability to obtain the satisfaction of each action capability in the mission task;

[0120] In this embodiment, the satisfaction level of each action capability in the mission task is:

[0121]

[0122] Among them, C i is the satisfaction level of the i-th action capability in the mission task; r j The jth combat function weight in each action capability, j = 1, 2, …, J, J is the number of combat functions in each action capability.

[0123] Step S56: Determine each action capability value according to each action capability parameter category in the mission task to calculate each action capability weight in the mission task.

[0124] When the i-th action capability parameter category is a landmark parameter, the i-th action capability value is A3; when the i-th action capability parameter category is a key parameter, the i-th action capability value is B3; when the i-th action capability parameter category is a general parameter, the i-th action capability value is C3, B3 is less than A3, and B3 is greater than C3.

[0125] Step S57: Using the weights of the various action capabilities in the mission task, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction of each action capability in the mission task to obtain the mission task satisfaction of each equipment.

[0126] In this embodiment, the mission satisfaction of each equipment is:

[0127]

[0128] Among them, C is mission satisfaction; r i is the weight of the i-th action capability in the mission task, i = 1, 2, …, I, and I is the number of action capabilities in the mission task.

[0129] Taking a platform combat test as a typical case, the specific application of the integrated process and methods of test design and evaluation is explained.

[0130] Based on the mission objectives of a typical combat system, corresponding capability items and indicators are set. Based on the operational requirements satisfaction evaluation (the degree of completion of the combat mission), appropriate capability indicators are selected to construct a test assessment indicator system. Taking a certain platform as an example, the test assessment indicator system is constructed, as shown in Table 1.

[0131] Table 1 Evaluation index system for combat test of a certain platform

[0132]

[0133] Focusing on the military needs and system positioning of a certain platform, we can derive its satisfaction evaluation parameter index system, such as Figure 3 shown.

[0134] Using the measurement criteria and satisfaction evaluation model, the capability parameter satisfaction is aggregated layer by layer to obtain the mission task satisfaction. Some calculation results are shown in Table 2.

[0135] Table 2 Quantitative analysis results of satisfaction with operational requirements of a certain platform

[0136]

[0137]

[0138]

[0139] A comprehensive assessment concluded that the platform met requirements for all key and critical capabilities under conditions similar to actual combat conditions and system confrontation. Across all elements and processes of the formation's combat operations, satisfaction with air defense operations outperformed anti-submarine operations, and overall mission satisfaction reached a good level. It is recommended that the tested equipment pass the operational test assessment.

[0140] The equipment combat test in this embodiment emphasizes "integration into the system and highlighting confrontation", takes combat needs as the fundamental driving force, sets assessment items and content according to the equipment combat mission and actual combat requirements, highlights the assessment and evaluation of equipment combat effectiveness and applicability, changes "combat technical index conformity comparison" to "combat demand conformity comparison", and uses whether the combat needs are met as the primary standard requirement for whether the combat test passes or fails, ensuring that the combat test design is driven by the combat demand level, meeting the combat needs, and improving the scientificity and rationality of the combat test design; the present invention fully considers the need to solve key combat problems, so that the equipment can meet the needs of the troops and solve the gap between practical difficult problems, so that each equipment can meet the needs of capability growth and the needs of troops, ensuring that the evaluation results are more focused on actual combat applications and closer to the needs of the troops.

[0141] The above embodiment can be implemented by adopting the technical solutions given in the following embodiments:

[0142] Another embodiment provides a demand-based integrated experimental design and evaluation system, which includes:

[0143] An acquisition module, configured to acquire a combat mission set and a combat capability set of each piece of equipment to determine an importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment in the combat capability set;

[0144] Forming a module for forming an assessment indicator system for the combat mission set using capability growth requirements and force utilization requirements as well as the importance level of the combat capability of each equipment;

[0145] An experimental variable control design module is used to perform experimental variable control design using the assessment index system to form an experimental project plan;

[0146] A test project simulation module is used to perform test project simulation according to the test project plan to obtain simulation results of various combat capability indicators of each equipment;

[0147] The operational requirement satisfaction comprehensive module is used to use the importance level of the operational capability of each equipment and the simulation results of each operational capability indicator to conduct an operational requirement satisfaction comprehensive evaluation to evaluate and verify the test project plan.

[0148] Furthermore, the acquisition module includes:

[0149] A first determining submodule is used to determine the importance weight of each combat task in the combat task set;

[0150] A second determination submodule is configured to determine a conversion value between each combat task in the combat task set and each combat capability in the combat capability set, so as to construct a conversion mapping matrix between combat tasks and combat capabilities;

[0151] The first calculation submodule is used to calculate the importance level of each combat capability by using the importance weight of each combat task and the conversion mapping matrix.

[0152] Furthermore, the forming module includes:

[0153] A problem decomposition submodule is used to decompose each combat mission using capability growth requirements, force utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capabilities of each piece of equipment to determine the key combat issues corresponding to each combat mission;

[0154] A tree decomposition submodule is used to perform tree decomposition on the key operational issues corresponding to each operational mission to obtain performance indicators corresponding to each evaluation indicator;

[0155] Wherein, the evaluation indicators include effectiveness indicators and applicability indicators;

[0156] The acquisition submodule is used to obtain the data elements required for each performance indicator and form a hierarchical indicator system;

[0157] The processing submodule is used to screen, merge and simplify the hierarchical indicator system in turn to obtain the assessment indicator system of the combat mission set.

[0158] Furthermore, the operational demand satisfaction comprehensive module includes:

[0159] The second calculation submodule is used to determine each combat capability index value according to each combat capability parameter category of each equipment to calculate the weight of each combat capability index in each combat function;

[0160] A third calculation submodule is configured to calculate the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function by using the simulation results of each combat capability indicator of each equipment;

[0161] A first weighted comprehensive processing submodule is configured to perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction scores of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function using the weights of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function to obtain the satisfaction scores of each combat function in each action capability;

[0162] a fourth calculation submodule, for determining each combat function value according to each combat function parameter category in each action capability, so as to calculate each combat function weight in each action capability;

[0163] A second weighted comprehensive processing submodule is configured to perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction level of each combat function in each action capability using the weight of each combat function in each action capability to obtain the satisfaction level of each action capability in the mission task;

[0164] a fifth calculation submodule, for determining each action capability value according to each action capability parameter category in the mission task, so as to calculate each action capability weight in the mission task;

[0165] The third weighted comprehensive processing submodule is used to use the weights of each action capability in the mission task to perform weighted comprehensive processing on each action capability satisfaction in the mission task to obtain the mission task satisfaction of each equipment.

[0166] The principles, formulas and parameter definitions involved in the above embodiments are all applicable and will not be described in detail here.

[0167] The above embodiments merely represent several implementation methods of the present application. While the descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the present invention. It should be noted that a person skilled in the art could make various modifications and improvements without departing from the spirit of the present application, all of which fall within the scope of protection of the present application. Therefore, the scope of protection of the present patent application shall be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A demand-based integrated experimental design and evaluation method, characterized by: The integrated approach to trial design and evaluation includes: Step S1: Obtain the combat mission set and combat capability set of each equipment to determine the importance level of the combat capability of each equipment in the combat capability set; Step S2: using the capability growth requirements, the troop utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment to form an assessment indicator system for the combat mission set; Step S3: using the assessment index system to conduct experimental variable control design to form an experimental project plan; Step S4: Perform test project simulation according to the test project plan to obtain simulation results of various combat capability indicators of each equipment; Step S5: Using the simulation results of the various combat capability indicators, conduct a comprehensive assessment of combat requirement satisfaction to evaluate and demonstrate the pilot project plan.

2. The integrated experimental design and evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S1, the specific process of determining the importance level of each combat capability in the combat capability set includes: Step S11, determining the importance weight of each combat task in the combat task set; Step S12: determining a conversion value between each combat task in the combat task set and each combat capability in the combat capability set, so as to construct a conversion mapping matrix between combat tasks and combat capabilities; Step S13: Calculate the importance level of each combat capability using the importance weights of each combat mission and the conversion mapping matrix.

3. The integrated experimental design and evaluation method according to claim 2, characterized in that: The specific implementation process of step S2 includes: Step S21: Decompose each combat mission using the capability growth requirements, the force utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment to determine the key combat issues corresponding to each combat mission. Step S22: performing tree decomposition on the key operational issues corresponding to each operational mission to obtain performance indicators corresponding to each evaluation indicator; In the step S22, the evaluation index includes an effectiveness index and an applicability index; Step S23: Obtain the data elements required for each performance indicator and form a hierarchical indicator system; Step S24: screening, merging and simplifying the hierarchical indicator system in sequence to obtain the assessment indicator system of the combat mission set.

4. The integrated experimental design and evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: In step S5, the specific process of integrating operational requirements satisfaction includes: Step S51: Determine each combat capability index value according to each combat capability parameter category of each equipment to calculate the weight of each combat capability index in each combat function; Step S52: Calculate the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function using the simulation results of each combat capability indicator of each equipment; Step S53: Using the weights of the combat capability indicators in each combat function, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction scores of the combat capability indicators in each combat function to obtain the satisfaction scores of each combat function in each action capability. Step S54: Determine each combat function value according to each combat function parameter category in each action capability to calculate each combat function weight in each action capability; Step S55: Using the weights of the various combat functions in each action capability, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction of each combat function in each action capability to obtain the satisfaction of each action capability in the mission task; Step S56: Determine each action capability value according to each action capability parameter category in the mission task to calculate each action capability weight in the mission task; Step S57: Using the weights of the various action capabilities in the mission task, perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction of each action capability in the mission task to obtain the mission task satisfaction of each equipment.

5. The integrated experimental design and evaluation method according to claim 4, characterized in that: In step S51, the weights of the combat capability indicators in each combat function are: Among them, r k and μ k are the kth combat capability indicator weight and the kth combat capability indicator value in each combat function, respectively, k = 1, 2,…, K, K is the number of combat capability indicators in each combat function.

6. The integrated experimental design and evaluation method according to claim 5, characterized in that: In the step S52, the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in the combat function is: Among them, C k and a k are the kth combat capability indicator satisfaction and kth combat capability indicator simulation results in each combat function; h k , h′ k and h″ k are the ideal demand satisfaction threshold, basic demand satisfaction threshold, and minimum demand satisfaction threshold corresponding to the kth combat capability indicator in each combat function; In step S53, the satisfaction level of each combat function in each action capability is: Among them, C j is the jth combat function satisfaction in each action capability.

7. A demand-based integrated experimental design and evaluation system, characterized by: The integrated experimental design and evaluation system includes: An acquisition module, configured to acquire a combat mission set and a combat capability set of each piece of equipment to determine an importance level of the combat capability of each piece of equipment in the combat capability set; Forming a module for forming an assessment indicator system for the combat mission set using capability growth requirements and force utilization requirements as well as the importance level of the combat capability of each equipment; An experimental variable control design module is used to perform experimental variable control design using the assessment index system to form an experimental project plan; A test project simulation module is used to perform test project simulation according to the test project plan to obtain simulation results of various combat capability indicators of each equipment; The operational requirement satisfaction comprehensive module is used to use the importance level of the operational capability of each equipment and the simulation results of each operational capability indicator to conduct an operational requirement satisfaction comprehensive evaluation to evaluate and verify the test project plan.

8. The integrated experimental design and evaluation system according to claim 7, characterized in that: The acquisition module includes: A first determining submodule is used to determine the importance weight of each combat task in the combat task set; A second determination submodule is configured to determine a conversion value between each combat task in the combat task set and each combat capability in the combat capability set, so as to construct a conversion mapping matrix between combat tasks and combat capabilities; The first calculation submodule is used to calculate the importance level of each combat capability by using the importance weight of each combat task and the conversion mapping matrix.

9. The integrated experimental design and evaluation system according to claim 8, characterized in that: The formation module includes: A problem decomposition submodule is used to decompose each combat mission using capability growth requirements, force utilization requirements, and the importance level of the combat capabilities of each piece of equipment to determine the key combat issues corresponding to each combat mission; A tree decomposition submodule is used to perform tree decomposition on the key operational issues corresponding to each operational mission to obtain performance indicators corresponding to each evaluation indicator; Wherein, the evaluation indicators include effectiveness indicators and applicability indicators; The acquisition submodule is used to obtain the data elements required for each performance indicator and form a hierarchical indicator system; The processing submodule is used to screen, merge and simplify the hierarchical indicator system in turn to obtain the assessment indicator system of the combat mission set.

10. The integrated experimental design and evaluation system according to claim 9, characterized in that: The operational demand satisfaction comprehensive module includes: The second calculation submodule is used to determine each combat capability index value according to each combat capability parameter category of each equipment to calculate the weight of each combat capability index in each combat function; A third calculation submodule is configured to calculate the satisfaction level of each combat capability indicator in each combat function by using the simulation results of each combat capability indicator of each equipment; A first weighted comprehensive processing submodule is configured to perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction scores of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function using the weights of the various combat capability indicators in each combat function to obtain the satisfaction scores of each combat function in each action capability; a fourth calculation submodule, for determining each combat function value according to each combat function parameter category in each action capability, so as to calculate each combat function weight in each action capability; A second weighted comprehensive processing submodule is configured to perform weighted comprehensive processing on the satisfaction level of each combat function in each action capability using the weight of each combat function in each action capability to obtain the satisfaction level of each action capability in the mission task; a fifth calculation submodule, for determining each action capability value according to each action capability parameter category in the mission task, so as to calculate each action capability weight in the mission task; The third weighted comprehensive processing submodule is used to use the weights of each action capability in the mission task to perform weighted comprehensive processing on each action capability satisfaction in the mission task to obtain the mission task satisfaction of each equipment.

Images