A low-altitude airspace operation efficiency comprehensive evaluation method

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of low air space operation efficiency comprehensive evaluation method, comprising the following steps: step 1, receiving the various information of low air space in administrative region;Step 2, construct low air space operation efficiency evaluation index system;Step 3, establish comment set;Step 4, establish index membership degree, generate evaluation matrix;Step 5, determine index weight;Step 6, carry out comprehensive evaluation operation, generate the comprehensive evaluation result of low air space operation efficiency;Step 7, release comprehensive evaluation result, complete the low air space operation efficiency comprehensive evaluation.The method provides a technical basis for low air space planning, low air space dynamic management, low flight service, and the implementation method is simple, fast and easy to operate, which is beneficial to improve the low flight service system capacity;For province, city and other levels of administrative region low air space collaborative management, low flight service provides a technical basis.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of low-altitude economic technology, and in particular relates to a comprehensive evaluation method for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency. Background Technology

[0002] Low-altitude airspace assessment is fundamental to the scientific planning of low-altitude airspace and the efficient implementation of low-altitude flight activities. Existing technologies mainly include low-altitude airspace capacity assessment and low-altitude flight conflict and collision risk assessment, with less focus on low-altitude airspace operational efficiency assessment. Among closely related air traffic management technologies, some have established control operation quality evaluation index systems based on aspects such as safety, efficiency, economy, workload, control workload, control system reliability, and traffic congestion; others have established control operation quality evaluation index systems composed of both subjective and objective operational indicators, and proposed control operation quality evaluation methods based on entropy weight cloud models. Currently, a systematic assessment method for low-altitude airspace operational efficiency is lacking.

[0003] The assessment of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency involves both the basic conditions of low-altitude airspace within an administrative region and the effectiveness of low-altitude flight operations. This broad scope makes accurate assessment challenging. Therefore, a new technical solution is needed to address these technical problems.

[0004] It should be noted that the information disclosed in the background section above is only used to enhance the understanding of the background of this disclosure, and therefore may include information that does not constitute prior art known to those skilled in the art. Summary of the Invention

[0005] Purpose of the invention: The technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a comprehensive evaluation method for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency, which addresses the shortcomings of the existing technology.

[0006] To address the aforementioned technical problems, this invention discloses a comprehensive evaluation method for low-altitude airspace operational efficiency, comprising the following steps:

[0007] Step 1: Receive various information about low-altitude airspace within the administrative region;

[0008] Step 2: Based on the various types of information received in Step 1, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system;

[0009] Step 3: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, establish a set of evaluation criteria for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency;

[0010] Step 4: Based on the comment set established in Step 3, establish the membership degree of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index and generate the evaluation matrix;

[0011] Step 5: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, determine the weights of the indicators for evaluating the operational efficiency of low-altitude airspace.

[0012] Step 6: Based on the evaluation matrix generated in Step 4 and the index weights determined in Step 5, perform a comprehensive evaluation calculation to generate a comprehensive evaluation result of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

[0013] Step 7: Publish the comprehensive evaluation results of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency generated in Step 6, and complete the comprehensive evaluation of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

[0014] Furthermore, the information on low-altitude airspace within the administrative region includes: the land area of ​​the administrative region, the area of ​​various types of airspace, the number of low-altitude air routes, the subordinate administrative regions where each low-altitude air route is located, the number of general aviation airports, the number of UAV take-off and landing sites, the number of flights in various types of airspace, the number of flights in low-altitude air routes, the usage duration of various types of airspace, the flight plan approval time, the flight plan approval status, the approval status of low-altitude airspace usage requests, and the approval status of low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requests.

[0015] Furthermore, step 2 involves constructing a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system. This index system is a three-level index system, including 3 secondary indicators and 19 tertiary indicators, and specifically includes the following steps:

[0016] Step 2-1: Based on the various information received in Step 1, establish three secondary indicators: usability, practicality, and collaboration, represented by A, P, and C respectively, as follows:

[0017]

[0018] Where U is the total set of evaluation indicators;

[0019] Step 2-2: Based on the secondary indicator A established in Step 2-1, establish eight tertiary indicators, including: the proportion of flyable airspace area to the total land area, the proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area, the continuity of flyable airspace, the continuity of reported low-altitude airspace, the density of low-altitude air routes, the coverage rate of low-altitude air routes, the density of general aviation airports, and the density of UAV take-off and landing sites, represented by A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, and A8 respectively.

[0020] ;

[0021] Step 2-3: Based on the secondary indicator A availability established in Step 2-2, establish the mathematical expressions for each indicator to which the tertiary indicator belongs;

[0022] Step 2-4: Based on the secondary indicator P established in Step 2-1, establish six tertiary indicators, including: flight density in suitable airspace, flight density in other types of low-altitude airspace, flight density of low-altitude routes, average utilization rate of suitable airspace, average utilization rate of other types of low-altitude airspace, and average utilization rate of low-altitude routes, represented by P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, and P6 respectively, as follows:

[0023] ;

[0024] Steps 2-5: Based on the secondary indicator P of practicality established in Step 2-4, establish the mathematical expressions for each indicator to which it belongs.

[0025] Steps 2-6: Based on the secondary indicator synergy C established in Step 2-1, establish five tertiary indicators, including: average flight plan approval time, flight plan approval pass rate, average emergency flight approval time, low-altitude airspace usage request approval pass rate, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment request approval pass rate, represented by C1, C2, C3, C4, and C5 respectively, as follows:

[0026] ;

[0027] Steps 2-7: Based on the secondary indicator synergy C established in Step 2-6, establish the mathematical expressions for each indicator to which it belongs.

[0028] Step 2-8: Based on the secondary indicators established in Steps 2-1 to 2-6 and their respective tertiary indicators, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system.

[0029] Furthermore, the mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A belongs, as described in steps 2-3, are as follows:

[0030] The ratio of airspace suitable for flight to the total land area (A1) refers to the ratio of airspace suitable for flight by micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to the total land area of ​​the administrative region, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0031]

[0032] in, This represents the airspace area suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within the administrative region, where s is the land area of ​​the administrative region.

[0033] The proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area (A2) refers to the ratio of the total area of ​​low-altitude control, surveillance, and reporting airspace to the total land area of ​​the administrative region, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0034]

[0035] in, , , These respectively represent the area of ​​the low-altitude airspace under control, surveillance, and reporting within the administrative region;

[0036] The continuity of airspace (A3) refers to the average area of ​​a continuous range of airspace suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), mathematically represented as: , is represented as:

[0037]

[0038] in, This indicates the number of consecutive airspaces suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within an administrative region;

[0039] The continuity of low-altitude reporting airspace (A4) refers to the average area of ​​continuous low-altitude reporting airspace, mathematically represented as: , is represented as:

[0040]

[0041] in, Indicates the number of consecutive low-altitude reporting airspaces within the administrative region;

[0042] The low-altitude air route density (A5) refers to the ratio of the total mileage of low-altitude air routes to the land area of ​​an administrative region, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0043]

[0044] in, This indicates the total mileage of low-altitude air routes within the administrative region.

[0045] Low-altitude air route coverage (A6) refers to the ratio of the number of subordinate administrative regions to which an administrative region is covered by low-altitude air routes to the total number of subordinate administrative regions to which that administrative region belongs. The mathematical symbol is [symbol missing]. , is represented as:

[0046]

[0047] in, This indicates the number of subordinate administrative regions within the administrative region that can be covered by low-altitude air routes. The total number of subordinate administrative regions to which the administrative region belongs;

[0048] General aviation airport density A7 refers to the ratio of the number of general aviation airports to the land area of ​​an administrative region, expressed by the mathematical symbol [missing information]. , is represented as:

[0049]

[0050] in, Indicates the number of general aviation airports within the administrative region;

[0051] The density of drone take-off and landing sites (A8) refers to the ratio of the number of drone take-off and landing sites to the land area of ​​an administrative region, expressed in mathematical symbols. , is represented as:

[0052]

[0053] in, This indicates the number of drone take-off and landing sites within the administrative region.

[0054] Furthermore, the mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs, as described in steps 2-4, are as follows:

[0055] Flight density P1 in airspace refers to the ratio of the number of flights of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) within airspace per unit time to the area of ​​airspace suitable for flight, expressed mathematically as: , is represented as:

[0056]

[0057] in, This represents the number of flights of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles in the airspace suitable for flight on day l (1≤l≤L) within the evaluation period, where L is the total number of days in the evaluation period.

[0058] Other types of low-altitude airspace flight density P2 refers to the ratio of the number of flights within the low-altitude control, surveillance, and reporting airspace per unit time to the total area of ​​the low-altitude control, surveillance, and reporting airspace, expressed mathematically as: , is represented as:

[0059]

[0060] in, This indicates the number of flights within the low-altitude airspace controlled, monitored, and reported on day l within the assessment period;

[0061] Low-altitude air route flight density P3 refers to the ratio of the number of flights per unit time to the total distance of low-altitude air routes, expressed mathematically as follows: , is represented as:

[0062]

[0063] in, This indicates the number of flights on the low-altitude air route on day l within the assessment period;

[0064] Average Airspace Utilization Rate (P4) refers to the average duration of airspace utilization for micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles per unit time, expressed mathematically as: , is represented as:

[0065]

[0066] in, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of a continuous airspace suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles;

[0067] Other types of low-altitude airspace average utilization rate P5 refers to the average duration of low-altitude airspace used for control, surveillance, and reporting per unit time, denoted by the mathematical symbol […]. , is represented as:

[0068]

[0069] in, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of consecutive low-altitude controlled airspace, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of a continuous low-altitude surveillance airspace, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of consecutive low-altitude reporting airspace, , These represent the number of consecutive low-altitude controlled and monitored airspaces within the administrative region, respectively.

[0070] The average utilization rate (P6) of low-altitude air routes refers to the average usage time of low-altitude air routes per unit time, expressed in mathematical symbols as follows: , is represented as:

[0071]

[0072] in, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The usage time of these low-altitude air routes, This indicates the number of low-altitude air routes within an administrative region.

[0073] Furthermore, the mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs, as described in steps 2-6, are as follows:

[0074] The average flight plan approval time (C1) refers to the average time required from submitting an application to receiving approval for a flight plan. The mathematical symbol is […]. , is represented as:

[0075]

[0076] in, This represents the time required from application submission to approval for the k-th (1≤k≤K) flight plan within the evaluation period, where K is the number of flight plans submitted within the evaluation period.

[0077] Flight plan approval rate (C2) refers to the percentage of submitted flight plans approved by air traffic management authorities or low-altitude flight service agencies, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0078]

[0079] in, To evaluate the approval coefficient of the k-th (1≤k≤K) flight plan within the time period, it is expressed as:

[0080] ;

[0081] The average approval time (C3) for emergency flights refers to the average time required from application submission to approval for flight plans used for emergency rescue, medical evacuation, and other urgent missions. The mathematical symbol is [symbol missing]. , is represented as:

[0082]

[0083] in, This represents the time required from application submission to approval for the j-th (1≤j≤J) emergency flight plan within the evaluation period, where J is the number of emergency flight plans submitted within the evaluation period.

[0084] The low-altitude airspace use request approval rate (C4) refers to the percentage of low-altitude airspace use requests approved by air traffic management authorities or low-altitude flight service agencies, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0085]

[0086] Where I represents the number of low-altitude airspace usage requests submitted during the assessment period. To evaluate the approval coefficient for the i-th (1≤i≤I) low-altitude airspace usage demand within the time period, it is expressed as:

[0087] ;

[0088] The approval rate (C5) for dynamic adjustments to low-altitude airspace refers to the percentage of such requests approved by air traffic management authorities or low-altitude flight service providers. The mathematical symbol is [missing information]. , is represented as:

[0089]

[0090] Where G represents the number of low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requests submitted during the assessment period. To evaluate the approval coefficient for the g-th (1≤g≤G) low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requirement within the time period, it is expressed as:

[0091] .

[0092] Furthermore, the establishment of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation set mentioned in step 3 is represented as follows:

[0093] .

[0094] Furthermore, step 4, which involves establishing the membership degree of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index and generating the evaluation matrix, specifically includes the following steps:

[0095] Step 4-1: Based on the evaluation set established in Step 3, establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix R of usability A. A , is represented as:

[0096] ;

[0097] in, This indicates the second-level indicator A's belonging to the [missing information - likely a specific category or metric]. The third-level indicator The degree of membership of each comment , .

[0098] Step 4-2, based on the evaluation matrix R of the secondary indicator availability A generated in Step 4-1. A Establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix R of practicality P. P , is represented as:

[0099] ;

[0100] in, , This indicates the second-level indicator P to which the practicality belongs. The third-level indicator The degree of membership of each comment .

[0101] Step 4-3: Based on the evaluation matrix R of the secondary indicator practicality P generated in Step 4-2. P Establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix R of synergy C.C , is represented as:

[0102] .

[0103] in, This indicates that the secondary indicator synergy C belongs to the first... The third-level indicator The degree of membership of each comment .

[0104] Furthermore, the membership degree of each tertiary index to which the secondary index availability A belongs in step 4-1 is a slanted-large uniformly distributed fuzzy function, with a value of 1 or 0.

[0105] The membership degree of each tertiary index to which the secondary index practicality P belongs in step 4-2 is a slanted-large uniformly distributed fuzzy function, with a value of 1 or 0.

[0106] To ensure fairness in the comprehensive evaluation, a uniformly distributed fuzzy function is selected for membership. The higher the membership of each of the tertiary indicators to which the secondary indicator A (availableness) mentioned in step 4-1 and the secondary indicator P (utility) mentioned in step 4-2 belong, the higher the efficiency of low-altitude airspace operation. Therefore, a relatively large uniformly distributed fuzzy function is selected.

[0107] Furthermore, the membership degree of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator availability A belongs in step 4-1 is represented as follows:

[0108] The membership degree of the proportion of airspace suitable for flight to the total land area, A1, is expressed as:

[0109] ;

[0110] The membership degree of A2, representing the proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area, is expressed as follows:

[0111] ;

[0112] The membership degree of the continuity of airspace (A3) is represented as follows:

[0113]

[0114] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum areas of the airspace suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within the administrative region, respectively.

[0115] The membership degree of the low-altitude reporting airspace continuity A4 is expressed as:

[0116]

[0117] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum areas of continuous low-altitude reporting airspace within the administrative region, respectively.

[0118] The membership degree of low-altitude air route density A5 is expressed as:

[0119]

[0120] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of low-altitude air route density within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0121] The membership degree of low-altitude air route coverage A6 is expressed as:

[0122]

[0123] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of low-altitude air route coverage within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0124] The membership degree of general aviation airport density A7 is expressed as follows:

[0125]

[0126] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of general aviation airport density within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0127] The membership degree of the drone take-off and landing site density A8 is expressed as:

[0128]

[0129] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of the density of drone take-off and landing sites within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0130] Furthermore, the membership degree of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs in step 4-2 is expressed as follows:

[0131] The membership degree of the flight density P1 in the suitable airspace is expressed as:

[0132]

[0133] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily flight counts of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within the airspace suitable for flight during the assessment period, respectively.

[0134] The membership degree of other types of low-altitude airspace flight density P2 is expressed as follows:

[0135]

[0136] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily number of flights within the low-altitude control, monitoring, and reporting airspace during the assessment period, respectively.

[0137] The membership degree of the low-altitude air route flight density P3 is expressed as:

[0138]

[0139] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily number of flights on low-altitude air routes during the assessment period, respectively.

[0140] The membership degree of the average utilization rate of airspace suitable for flight, P4, is expressed as:

[0141]

[0142] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage time of the suitable airspace for a single consecutive micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicle within the evaluation period, respectively.

[0143] The membership degree of the average utilization rate P5 of other types of low-altitude airspace is represented as follows:

[0144]

[0145] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage duration of a single consecutive low-altitude controlled airspace within the assessment period, respectively. , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage duration of a single continuous low-altitude surveillance airspace within the assessment period, respectively. , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage duration of a single consecutive low-altitude reporting airspace within the assessment period, respectively.

[0146] The membership degree of the average utilization rate P6 of low-altitude air routes is expressed as:

[0147]

[0148] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage time of a single low-altitude air route during the assessment period, respectively.

[0149] Furthermore, the membership degrees of the flight plan average approval time C1 and emergency flight average approval time C3, which belong to the secondary indicator synergy C mentioned in steps 4-3, are both small-scale uniformly distributed fuzzy functions with values ​​of 1 or 0. The membership degrees of the flight plan approval pass rate C2, low-altitude airspace use demand approval pass rate C4, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment demand approval pass rate C5 are both large-scale uniformly distributed fuzzy functions with values ​​of 1 or 0.

[0150] To ensure fairness in the comprehensive evaluation, a uniformly distributed fuzzy function is selected for membership. The smaller the membership degree of the secondary indicator synergy C mentioned in step 4-3, the higher the efficiency of low-altitude airspace operation, which is reflected by the average approval time of flight plans C1 and the average approval time of emergency flights C3. Therefore, a slightly smaller uniformly distributed fuzzy function is selected. The larger the membership degree of flight plan approval rate C2, low-altitude airspace usage demand approval rate C4, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment demand approval rate C5, the higher the efficiency of low-altitude airspace operation. Therefore, a slightly larger uniformly distributed fuzzy function is selected.

[0151] Furthermore, the membership degree of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs in step 4-3 is expressed as follows:

[0152] The membership degree of the average approval time C1 for flight plans is expressed as:

[0153]

[0154] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum time required for a single flight plan to go from application submission to obtaining approval within the evaluation period, respectively.

[0155] The membership degree of the flight plan approval rate C2 is expressed as:

[0156] ;

[0157] The membership degree of the average approval time for emergency flights (C3) is expressed as follows:

[0158]

[0159] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum time required for a single emergency flight plan to go from application submission to approval within the assessment period, respectively.

[0160] The membership degree of the approval rate (C4) for low-altitude airspace use requests is expressed as:

[0161] ;

[0162] The membership degree of the approval rate (C5) for dynamic adjustment of low-altitude airspace is expressed as:

[0163] .

[0164] Beneficial effects:

[0165] 1. This invention provides a technical foundation for low-altitude airspace planning, low-altitude airspace dynamic management, and low-altitude flight services. The implementation method is simple, fast, and easy to operate, which is conducive to improving the capabilities of the low-altitude flight service system.

[0166] 2. This invention provides a technical basis for low-altitude airspace management and low-altitude traffic management. Attached Figure Description

[0167] The present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments, and the advantages of the present invention in the above and / or other aspects will become clearer.

[0168] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the overall process of the present invention.

[0169] Figure 2 This invention provides an evaluation index system for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

[0170] Figure 3 This is a flowchart illustrating the method for establishing the membership degree of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index according to the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0171] The embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0172] The method proposed in this invention constructs a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system based on information such as the number of low-altitude air routes, flight frequency, and airspace usage duration within an administrative region. This system includes 3 secondary indicators and 19 tertiary indicators. The method also establishes a set of low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation comments and indicator membership degrees, determines the weight of each indicator, performs comprehensive evaluation calculations, and generates and publishes the comprehensive evaluation results of low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

[0173] like Figure 1 As shown, the specific technical solution of the present invention is as follows:

[0174] Step 1: Receive various information about low-altitude airspace within the administrative region, including: the land area of ​​the administrative region, the area of ​​various types of airspace, the number of low-altitude air routes, the subordinate administrative regions where each low-altitude air route is located, the number of general aviation airports, the number of UAV take-off and landing sites, the number of flights in various types of airspace, the number of flights in low-altitude air routes, the usage duration of various types of airspace, the flight plan approval time, the flight plan approval status, the approval status of low-altitude airspace usage requests, and the approval status of low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requests.

[0175] Step 2: Based on the various information received in Step 1, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system. This index system is a three-level index system, including 3 secondary indicators and 19 tertiary indicators, such as... Figure 2 As shown, the specific steps include:

[0176] Step 2-1: Based on the various information received in Step 1, establish three secondary indicators: usability, practicality, and collaboration, represented by A, P, and C respectively, as follows:

[0177]

[0178] Where U is the total set of evaluation indicators;

[0179] Step 2-2: Based on the secondary indicator A established in Step 2-1, establish eight tertiary indicators, including: the proportion of flyable airspace area to the total land area, the proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area, the continuity of flyable airspace, the continuity of reported low-altitude airspace, the density of low-altitude air routes, the coverage rate of low-altitude air routes, the density of general aviation airports, and the density of UAV take-off and landing sites, represented by A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, and A8 respectively.

[0180] ;

[0181] Step 2-3: Based on the secondary indicator A availability established in Step 2-2, establish the mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator, as follows:

[0182] The ratio of airspace suitable for flight to the total land area (A1) refers to the ratio of airspace suitable for flight by micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to the total land area of ​​the administrative region, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0183]

[0184] in, This represents the airspace area suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within the administrative region, where s is the land area of ​​the administrative region.

[0185] The proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area (A2) refers to the ratio of the total area of ​​low-altitude control, surveillance, and reporting airspace to the total land area of ​​the administrative region, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0186]

[0187] in, , , These respectively represent the area of ​​the low-altitude airspace under control, surveillance, and reporting within the administrative region;

[0188] The continuity of airspace (A3) refers to the average area of ​​a continuous range of airspace suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), mathematically represented as: , is represented as:

[0189]

[0190] in, This indicates the number of consecutive airspaces suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within an administrative region;

[0191] The continuity of low-altitude reporting airspace (A4) refers to the average area of ​​continuous low-altitude reporting airspace, mathematically represented as: , is represented as:

[0192]

[0193] in, Indicates the number of consecutive low-altitude reporting airspaces within the administrative region;

[0194] The low-altitude air route density (A5) refers to the ratio of the total mileage of low-altitude air routes to the land area of ​​an administrative region, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0195]

[0196] in, This indicates the total mileage of low-altitude air routes within the administrative region.

[0197] Low-altitude air route coverage (A6) refers to the ratio of the number of subordinate administrative regions to which an administrative region is covered by low-altitude air routes to the total number of subordinate administrative regions to which that administrative region belongs. The mathematical symbol is [symbol missing]. , is represented as:

[0198]

[0199] in, This indicates the number of subordinate administrative regions within the administrative region that can be covered by low-altitude air routes. The total number of subordinate administrative regions to which the administrative region belongs;

[0200] General aviation airport density A7 refers to the ratio of the number of general aviation airports to the land area of ​​an administrative region, expressed by the mathematical symbol [missing information]. , is represented as:

[0201]

[0202] in, Indicates the number of general aviation airports within the administrative region;

[0203] The density of drone take-off and landing sites (A8) refers to the ratio of the number of drone take-off and landing sites to the land area of ​​an administrative region, expressed in mathematical symbols. , is represented as:

[0204]

[0205] in, This indicates the number of drone take-off and landing sites within the administrative region;

[0206] Step 2-4: Based on the secondary indicator P established in Step 2-1, establish six tertiary indicators, including: flight density in suitable airspace, flight density in other types of low-altitude airspace, flight density of low-altitude routes, average utilization rate of suitable airspace, average utilization rate of other types of low-altitude airspace, and average utilization rate of low-altitude routes, represented by P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, and P6 respectively, as follows:

[0207] ;

[0208] Steps 2-5: Based on the secondary indicator practicality P established in Step 2-4, establish the mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator, as follows:

[0209] Flight density P1 in airspace refers to the ratio of the number of flights of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) within airspace per unit time to the area of ​​airspace suitable for flight, expressed mathematically as: , is represented as:

[0210]

[0211] in, This represents the number of flights of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles in the airspace suitable for flight on day l (1≤l≤L) within the evaluation period, where L is the total number of days in the evaluation period.

[0212] Other types of low-altitude airspace flight density P2 refers to the ratio of the number of flights within the low-altitude control, surveillance, and reporting airspace per unit time to the total area of ​​the low-altitude control, surveillance, and reporting airspace, expressed mathematically as: , is represented as:

[0213]

[0214] in, This indicates the number of flights within the low-altitude airspace controlled, monitored, and reported on day l within the assessment period;

[0215] Low-altitude air route flight density P3 refers to the ratio of the number of flights per unit time to the total distance of low-altitude air routes, expressed mathematically as follows: , is represented as:

[0216]

[0217] in, This indicates the number of flights on the low-altitude air route on day l within the assessment period;

[0218] Average Airspace Utilization Rate (P4) refers to the average duration of airspace utilization for micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles per unit time, expressed mathematically as: , is represented as:

[0219]

[0220] in, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of a continuous airspace suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles;

[0221] Other types of low-altitude airspace average utilization rate P5 refers to the average duration of low-altitude airspace used for control, surveillance, and reporting per unit time, denoted by the mathematical symbol […]. , is represented as:

[0222]

[0223] in, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of consecutive low-altitude controlled airspace, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of a continuous low-altitude surveillance airspace, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The duration of use of consecutive low-altitude reporting airspace, , These represent the number of consecutive low-altitude controlled and monitored airspaces within the administrative region, respectively.

[0224] The average utilization rate (P6) of low-altitude air routes refers to the average usage time of low-altitude air routes per unit time, expressed in mathematical symbols as follows: , is represented as:

[0225]

[0226] in, This indicates the nth day of the l-th day within the evaluation period (1≤n≤). The usage time of these low-altitude air routes, This indicates the number of low-altitude air routes within the administrative region;

[0227] Steps 2-6: Based on the secondary indicator synergy C established in Step 2-1, establish five tertiary indicators, including: average flight plan approval time, flight plan approval pass rate, average emergency flight approval time, low-altitude airspace usage request approval pass rate, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment request approval pass rate, represented by C1, C2, C3, C4, and C5 respectively, as follows:

[0228] ;

[0229] Steps 2-7: Based on the secondary indicator synergy C established in Step 2-6, establish the mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator, as follows:

[0230] The average flight plan approval time (C1) refers to the average time required from submitting an application to receiving approval for a flight plan. The mathematical symbol is […]. , is represented as:

[0231]

[0232] in, This represents the time required from application submission to approval for the k-th (1≤k≤K) flight plan within the evaluation period, where K is the number of flight plans submitted within the evaluation period.

[0233] Flight plan approval rate (C2) refers to the percentage of submitted flight plans approved by air traffic management authorities or low-altitude flight service agencies, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0234]

[0235] in, To evaluate the approval coefficient of the k-th (1≤k≤K) flight plan within the time period, it is expressed as:

[0236] ;

[0237] The average approval time (C3) for emergency flights refers to the average time required from application submission to approval for flight plans used for emergency rescue, medical evacuation, and other urgent missions. The mathematical symbol is [symbol missing]. , is represented as:

[0238]

[0239] in, This represents the time required from application submission to approval for the j-th (1≤j≤J) emergency flight plan within the evaluation period, where J is the number of emergency flight plans submitted within the evaluation period.

[0240] The low-altitude airspace use request approval rate (C4) refers to the percentage of low-altitude airspace use requests approved by air traffic management authorities or low-altitude flight service agencies, expressed as a mathematical symbol. , is represented as:

[0241]

[0242] Where I represents the number of low-altitude airspace usage requests submitted during the assessment period. To evaluate the approval coefficient for the i-th (1≤i≤I) low-altitude airspace usage demand within the time period, it is expressed as:

[0243] ;

[0244] The approval rate (C5) for dynamic adjustments to low-altitude airspace refers to the percentage of such requests approved by air traffic management authorities or low-altitude flight service providers. The mathematical symbol is [missing information]. , is represented as:

[0245]

[0246] Where G represents the number of low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requests submitted during the assessment period. To evaluate the approval coefficient for the g-th (1≤g≤G) low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requirement within the time period, it is expressed as:

[0247] ;

[0248] Step 2-8: Based on the secondary indicators established in Steps 2-1 to 2-6 and their respective tertiary indicators, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system.

[0249] Step 3: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, establish a set of evaluation criteria for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency, represented as follows:

[0250] .

[0251] Step 4: Based on the comment set established in Step 3, establish the membership degrees of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation indicators and generate an evaluation matrix, such as... Figure 3 As shown, the specific steps include:

[0252] Step 4-1: Based on the evaluation set established in Step 3, establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix R of usability A. A , is represented as:

[0253] ;

[0254] For x=1,2,3,4, the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A belongs are all slanted-large uniformly distributed fuzzy functions, taking values ​​of 1 or 0, as specifically represented below:

[0255] The membership degree of the proportion of airspace suitable for flight to the total land area, A1, is expressed as:

[0256] ;

[0257] The membership degree of A2, representing the proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area, is expressed as follows:

[0258] ;

[0259] The membership degree of the continuity of airspace (A3) is represented as follows:

[0260]

[0261] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum areas of the airspace suitable for the flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within the administrative region, respectively.

[0262] The membership degree of the low-altitude reporting airspace continuity A4 is expressed as:

[0263]

[0264] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum areas of continuous low-altitude reporting airspace within the administrative region, respectively.

[0265] The membership degree of low-altitude air route density A5 is expressed as:

[0266]

[0267] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of low-altitude air route density within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0268] The membership degree of low-altitude air route coverage A6 is expressed as:

[0269]

[0270] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of low-altitude air route coverage within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0271] The membership degree of general aviation airport density A7 is expressed as follows:

[0272]

[0273] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of general aviation airport density within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0274] The membership degree of the drone take-off and landing site density A8 is expressed as:

[0275]

[0276] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum values ​​of the density of drone take-off and landing sites within the same administrative region, respectively.

[0277] Step 4-2, based on the evaluation matrix R of the secondary indicator availability A generated in Step 4-1. A Establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix R of practicality P. P , is represented as:

[0278] ;

[0279] For x=1,2,3,4, the membership degree of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs is a slanted-large uniformly distributed fuzzy function, taking values ​​of 1 or 0, as specifically represented below:

[0280] The membership degree of the flight density P1 in the suitable airspace is expressed as:

[0281]

[0282] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily flight counts of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles within the airspace suitable for flight during the assessment period, respectively.

[0283] The membership degree of other types of low-altitude airspace flight density P2 is expressed as follows:

[0284]

[0285] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily number of flights within the low-altitude control, monitoring, and reporting airspace during the assessment period, respectively.

[0286] The membership degree of the low-altitude air route flight density P3 is expressed as:

[0287]

[0288] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily number of flights on low-altitude air routes during the assessment period, respectively.

[0289] The membership degree of the average utilization rate of airspace suitable for flight, P4, is expressed as:

[0290]

[0291] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage time of the suitable airspace for a single consecutive micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicle within the evaluation period, respectively.

[0292] The membership degree of the average utilization rate P5 of other types of low-altitude airspace is represented as follows:

[0293]

[0294] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage duration of a single consecutive low-altitude controlled airspace within the assessment period, respectively. , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage duration of a single continuous low-altitude surveillance airspace within the assessment period, respectively. , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage duration of a single consecutive low-altitude reporting airspace within the assessment period, respectively.

[0295] The membership degree of the average utilization rate P6 of low-altitude air routes is expressed as:

[0296]

[0297] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum daily usage durations of a single low-altitude air route during the assessment period, respectively.

[0298] Step 4-3: Based on the evaluation matrix R of the secondary indicator practicality P generated in Step 4-2. P Establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix R of synergy C. C , is represented as:

[0299] ;

[0300] x=1,2,3,4, where x represents the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs. The membership degrees of average flight plan approval time C1 and average emergency flight approval time C3 are both slightly small uniformly distributed fuzzy functions, taking values ​​of 1 or 0. The membership degrees of flight plan approval rate C2, low-altitude airspace usage demand approval rate C4, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment demand approval rate C5 are both slightly large uniformly distributed fuzzy functions, taking values ​​of 1 or 0. The specific representation is as follows:

[0301] The membership degree of the average approval time C1 for flight plans is expressed as:

[0302]

[0303] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum time required for a single flight plan to go from application submission to obtaining approval within the evaluation period, respectively.

[0304] The membership degree of the flight plan approval rate C2 is expressed as:

[0305] ;

[0306] The membership degree of the average approval time for emergency flights (C3) is expressed as follows:

[0307]

[0308] in, , These represent the minimum and maximum time required for a single emergency flight plan to go from application submission to approval within the assessment period, respectively.

[0309] The membership degree of the approval rate (C4) for low-altitude airspace use requests is expressed as:

[0310] ;

[0311] The membership degree of the approval rate (C5) for dynamic adjustment of low-altitude airspace is expressed as:

[0312] .

[0313] Step 5: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, the weights of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation indicators are determined by methods such as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and expert scoring. Weight values ​​are assigned to each secondary indicator and its respective tertiary indicators, generating a weight vector for the secondary indicators and a weight vector for the tertiary indicators to which each secondary indicator belongs.

[0314] Step 6: Based on the evaluation matrix generated in Step 4 and the indicator weights determined in Step 5, a comprehensive evaluation calculation is performed. The weight vector of the tertiary indicator to which each secondary indicator belongs is multiplied by the corresponding evaluation matrix to generate the evaluation vector of each secondary indicator. The weight vector of the secondary indicator is multiplied by the evaluation matrix composed of the evaluation vectors of each secondary indicator to obtain the total evaluation vector. The comprehensive evaluation result of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency is generated according to the principle of maximum membership.

[0315] Step 7: Publish the comprehensive evaluation results of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency generated in Step 6, and complete the comprehensive evaluation of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

[0316] Example:

[0317] Step 1: Receive statistical data from systems such as the low-altitude flight service platform of a certain administrative region. Assume that the various types of low-altitude airspace information within this administrative region are shown in Tables 1 to 7:

[0318] Table 1 Low-altitude airspace information

[0319]

[0320] Table 2. Daily flight information in various low-altitude airspaces during the assessment period.

[0321]

[0322] Table 3. Information on the duration of use of suitable airspace

[0323]

[0324] Table 4. Information on the duration of use of low-altitude controlled airspace.

[0325]

[0326] Table 5. Duration Information of Low-Altitude Surveillance Airspace

[0327]

[0328] Table 6. Duration of Low-Altitude Reporting Airspace Use

[0329]

[0330] Table 7. Usage Duration Information for Low-Altitude Air Routes

[0331]

[0332] Step 2: Based on the various information received in Step 1, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system and calculate the values ​​of each index as follows:

[0333] The proportion of flyable airspace to the total land area, A1, is 0.2667.

[0334] The proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace to the total land area (A2) is 0.6167.

[0335] The continuity of the airspace suitable for flight (A3) is 290.9 square kilometers;

[0336] The continuity of low-altitude reporting airspace is 200 square kilometers for A4.

[0337] The low-altitude air route density for A5 is 125 meters per square kilometer.

[0338] The low-altitude air route coverage for A6 is 0.75.

[0339] The density of general aviation airports on the A7 level is 1.6667 per 10,000 square kilometers.

[0340] The density of drone take-off and landing sites, A8, is 25 sites per 10,000 square kilometers.

[0341] The flight density P1 in the suitable airspace is 0.5158 flights / square kilometer / day;

[0342] The flight density P2 for other types of low-altitude airspace is 0.0408 flights / km² / day;

[0343] The flight density (P3) for low-altitude air routes is 0.3236 flights / km / day;

[0344] The average utilization rate of airspace for flight, P4, is 5.4273 hours / airspace / day.

[0345] The average utilization rate (P5) of other types of low-altitude airspace is 21.6125 hours / low-altitude airspace / day;

[0346] The average utilization rate of low-altitude air routes (P6) is 8.55 hours / low-altitude air route / day.

[0347] The average approval time for a C1 flight plan is 6 hours.

[0348] The flight plan approval rate for C2 is 90%.

[0349] The average approval time for emergency flights (C3) is 0.5 hours.

[0350] The approval rate for low-altitude airspace use requests (C4) is 85%.

[0351] The approval rate for dynamic adjustments to low-altitude airspace is 90% for C5.

[0352] Step 3: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, establish the following set of evaluation criteria for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency:

[0353] .

[0354] Step 4: Based on the comment set established in Step 3, establish the membership degree of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index, and generate the evaluation matrix as follows:

[0355] Availability A evaluation matrix R A for:

[0356] ;

[0357] Evaluation matrix R of practicality P P for:

[0358] ;

[0359] Evaluation matrix R of synergy C C for:

[0360] .

[0361] Step 5: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, the weights of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation indicators are determined using the expert scoring method as follows:

[0362] The weight vectors for the secondary indicators A (availability), P (utility), and C (synergy) are as follows: The weight vector of the tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A belongs is: The weight vector of the tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs is: The weight vector of the tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs is: .

[0363] Step 6: Based on the evaluation matrix generated in Step 4 and the indicator weights determined in Step 5, a comprehensive evaluation calculation is performed, as follows:

[0364] ;

[0365] ;

[0366] ;

[0367] ;

[0368] The comprehensive assessment result generated based on the principle of maximum membership degree indicates that the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency of this administrative region is relatively high.

[0369] Step 7: Publish the comprehensive evaluation results of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency generated in Step 6, and complete the comprehensive evaluation of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

[0370] In its specific implementation, this application provides a computer storage medium and a corresponding data processing unit. The computer storage medium is capable of storing a computer program, which, when executed by the data processing unit, can run the invention's content regarding a comprehensive evaluation method for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency, as well as some or all of the steps in various embodiments. The storage medium can be a magnetic disk, optical disk, read-only memory (ROM), or random access memory (RAM), etc.

[0371] Those skilled in the art will clearly understand that the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention can be implemented using computer programs and their corresponding general-purpose hardware platforms. Based on this understanding, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, or the parts that contribute to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of computer programs, i.e., software products. These computer program software products can be stored in a storage medium and include several instructions to cause a device containing a data processing unit (which may be a personal computer, server, microcontroller, MUU, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in various embodiments or certain parts of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0372] This invention provides a concept and method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency. Many methods and approaches exist for implementing this technical solution; the above description is merely a preferred embodiment. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various improvements and modifications without departing from the principles of this invention, and these improvements and modifications should also be considered within the scope of protection of this invention. All components not explicitly stated in this embodiment can be implemented using existing technologies.

Claims

1. A comprehensive evaluation method for low-altitude airspace operational efficiency, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step 1: Receive various information about low-altitude airspace within the administrative region; Step 2: Based on the various types of information received in Step 1, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system; Step 3: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, establish a set of evaluation criteria for low-altitude airspace operation efficiency; Step 4: Based on the comment set established in Step 3, establish the membership degree of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index and generate the evaluation matrix; Step 5: Based on the indicator system constructed in Step 2, determine the weights of the indicators for evaluating the operational efficiency of low-altitude airspace. Step 6: Based on the evaluation matrix generated in Step 4 and the index weights determined in Step 5, perform a comprehensive evaluation calculation to generate a comprehensive evaluation result of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency. Step 7: Publish the comprehensive evaluation results of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency generated in Step 6, and complete the comprehensive evaluation of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency.

2. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 1, characterized in that, Information on low-altitude airspace within the administrative region includes: the land area of ​​the administrative region, the area of ​​each type of airspace, the number of low-altitude air routes, the subordinate administrative regions where each low-altitude air route is located, the number of general aviation airports, the number of UAV take-off and landing sites, the number of flights in each type of airspace, the number of flights in low-altitude air routes, the usage duration of each type of airspace, the flight plan approval time, the flight plan approval status, the approval status of low-altitude airspace usage requests, and the approval status of low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment requests.

3. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 2, characterized in that, Step 2 describes the construction of a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system. This index system is a three-tiered system, comprising 3 secondary indicators and 19 tertiary indicators, and specifically includes the following steps: Step 2-1: Based on the various information received in Step 1, establish three secondary indicators: usability, practicality, and collaboration, represented by A, P, and C respectively, as follows: Where U is the total set of evaluation indicators; Step 2-2: Based on the secondary indicator A established in Step 2-1, establish eight tertiary indicators, including: the proportion of flyable airspace area to the total land area, the proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace area to the total land area, the continuity of flyable airspace, the continuity of reported low-altitude airspace, the density of low-altitude air routes, the coverage rate of low-altitude air routes, the density of general aviation airports, and the density of UAV take-off and landing sites, represented by A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, and A8 respectively. ; Step 2-3: Based on the secondary indicator A availability established in Step 2-2, establish the mathematical expressions for each indicator to which the tertiary indicator belongs; Step 2-4: Based on the secondary indicator P established in Step 2-1, establish six tertiary indicators, including: flight density in suitable airspace, flight density in other types of low-altitude airspace, flight density of low-altitude routes, average utilization rate of suitable airspace, average utilization rate of other types of low-altitude airspace, and average utilization rate of low-altitude routes, represented by P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, and P6 respectively, as follows: ; Steps 2-5: Based on the secondary indicator P of practicality established in Step 2-4, establish the mathematical expressions for each indicator to which it belongs. Steps 2-6: Based on the secondary indicator synergy C established in Step 2-1, establish five tertiary indicators, including: average flight plan approval time, flight plan approval pass rate, average emergency flight approval time, low-altitude airspace usage request approval pass rate, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment request approval pass rate, represented by C1, C2, C3, C4, and C5 respectively, as follows: ; Steps 2-7: Based on the secondary indicator synergy C established in Step 2-6, establish the mathematical expressions for each indicator to which it belongs. Step 2-8: Based on the secondary indicators established in Steps 2-1 to 2-7 and their respective tertiary indicators, construct a low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index system.

4. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 3, characterized in that, The mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A, described in steps 2-3, belongs, are as follows: The ratio of airspace suitable for flight to the total land area (A1) refers to the ratio of airspace suitable for flight of micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles to the total land area of ​​the administrative region. The proportion of other types of low-altitude airspace to the total land area (A2) refers to the ratio of the total area of ​​low-altitude control, monitoring, and reporting airspace to the total land area of ​​the administrative region. The continuity of airspace (A3) refers to the average area of ​​continuous airspace suitable for micro, light, and small unmanned aerial vehicles. The continuity of low-altitude reporting airspace (A4) refers to the average area of ​​continuous low-altitude reporting airspace. The low-altitude air route density A5 refers to the ratio of the total mileage of low-altitude air routes to the land area of ​​the administrative region. Low-altitude air route coverage A6 refers to the ratio of the number of subordinate administrative regions to which an administrative region can be covered by low-altitude air routes to the total number of subordinate administrative regions to which the administrative region belongs; General aviation airport density A7 refers to the ratio of the number of general aviation airports to the land area of ​​the administrative region; The density of drone take-off and landing sites (A8) refers to the ratio of the number of drone take-off and landing sites to the land area of ​​the administrative region.

5. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 4, characterized in that, The mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs, as described in steps 2-4, are as follows: Flight density P1 in airspace refers to the ratio of the number of flights of micro, light and small unmanned aerial vehicles in airspace per unit time to the area of ​​airspace. Other types of low-altitude airspace flight density P2 refers to the ratio of the number of flights in the low-altitude control, monitoring, and reporting airspace per unit time to the total area of ​​the low-altitude control, monitoring, and reporting airspace; Low-altitude air route flight density P3 refers to the ratio of the number of flights on low-altitude air routes per unit time to the total mileage of low-altitude air routes. The average utilization rate of airspace for airspace (P4) refers to the average duration of airspace used by micro, light and small unmanned aerial vehicles per unit time. The average utilization rate (P5) of other types of low-altitude airspace refers to the average usage time of low-altitude airspace for control, monitoring, and reporting per unit time. The average utilization rate of low-altitude air routes (P6) refers to the average usage time of low-altitude air routes per unit of time.

6. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 5, characterized in that, The mathematical expressions for each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs, as described in steps 2-6, are as follows: The average approval time for a flight plan (C1) refers to the average time required from submitting an application to receiving approval for a flight plan. Flight plan approval rate (C2) refers to the percentage of submitted flight plans that are approved by air traffic management agencies or low-altitude flight service agencies. The average approval time for emergency flights (C3) refers to the average time required from submitting an application to receiving approval for a flight plan for an emergency mission, including emergency rescue and medical assistance. The approval rate (C4) for low-altitude airspace use requests refers to the proportion of low-altitude airspace use requests that are approved by air traffic management agencies or low-altitude flight service agencies. The approval rate (C5) for dynamic adjustments to low-altitude airspace refers to the percentage of requests for such adjustments that are approved by air traffic management agencies or low-altitude flight service agencies.

7. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 6, characterized in that, The establishment of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation set mentioned in step 3 is represented as follows: 。 8. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 7, characterized in that, Step 4, which involves establishing the membership degree of the low-altitude airspace operation efficiency evaluation index and generating the evaluation matrix, specifically includes the following steps: Step 4-1: Based on the evaluation set established in Step 3, establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator A belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix of usability A. , This indicates the second-level indicator A's belonging to the [missing information - likely a specific category or metric]. The third-level indicator The degree of membership of each comment , ; Step 4-2, based on the evaluation matrix R of the secondary indicator availability A generated in Step 4-1. A Establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator practicality P belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix of practicality P. , This indicates the second-level indicator P to which the practicality belongs. The third-level indicator The degree of membership of each comment ; Step 4-3: Based on the evaluation matrix R of the secondary indicator practicality P generated in Step 4-2. P Establish the membership degrees of each tertiary indicator to which the secondary indicator synergy C belongs, and generate the evaluation matrix of synergy C. , This indicates that the secondary indicator synergy C belongs to the first... The third-level indicator The degree of membership of each comment .

9. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 8, characterized in that, The membership degree of each tertiary index to which the secondary index availability A belongs in step 4-1 is a slanted uniformly distributed fuzzy function, with a value of 1 or 0. The membership degree of each tertiary index to which the secondary index practicality P belongs in step 4-2 is a slanted-large uniformly distributed fuzzy function, with a value of 1 or 0.

10. The method for comprehensive evaluation of low-altitude airspace operational efficiency according to claim 9, characterized in that, The membership degrees of the flight plan average approval time C1 and emergency flight average approval time C3, which belong to the secondary indicator synergy C mentioned in step 4-3, are both small uniformly distributed fuzzy functions with values ​​of 1 or 0. The membership degrees of the flight plan approval pass rate C2, low-altitude airspace use demand approval pass rate C4, and low-altitude airspace dynamic adjustment demand approval pass rate C5 are both large uniformly distributed fuzzy functions with values ​​of 1 or 0.

Images