Cognitive Anti-jamming method employing hierarchical coordination of unmanned swarm

Abstract

The present invention relates to the technical field of telemetry, tracking, and command (TT&C) communications, and provides a cognitive anti-jamming method employing hierarchical coordination of an unmanned swarm, which addresses the limitations encountered by unmanned swarms when subjected to high interference intensity and high interference threat levels. In the method, on the basis of interference cognition assessment results of the unmanned swarm, a three-level cognitive anti-jamming strategy is employed to achieve efficient protection against external electromagnetic interference signals, thereby restoring a TT&C link of the unmanned swarm to normal operation. The three-level cognitive anti-jamming strategy comprises: an intra-terminal passive suppression strategy, in which each terminal independently performs passive jamming suppression internally; an inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy, in which all terminals in the unmanned swarm collaboratively perform active interference avoidance; and a station-terminal joint protection strategy, in which a TT&C station and the unmanned swarm implement data linkage, and cognitive strong-interference protection processing is performed on the basis of a decision result of the TT&C station. By taking into account the characteristics of the unmanned swarm, the present invention enhances the interference sensing and cognitive capabilities of the unmanned swarm, thereby improving the anti-jamming capability of the unmanned swarm in harsh electromagnetic environments.

Description

A cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned clusters Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of measurement and control communication technology, and is applied to the interference protection process of unmanned swarms in complex electromagnetic environments. Specifically, it relates to a cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms. Background Technology

[0002] Unmanned swarm technology, especially swarm systems composed of tiny unmanned platforms, has become a key technology area that countries around the world are vying to develop in recent years. These systems consist of various types of micro-sized unmanned devices such as drones, loitering munitions, unmanned vehicles, and unmanned surface vessels. They rely on the basic mission capabilities of individual platforms and achieve overall functional enhancement through efficient collaborative interaction between platforms. These swarm systems are built on an open architecture and artificial intelligence technology, possessing advantages such as high survivability, low cost, and distributed functionality, and are widely used in military and civilian fields.

[0003] In complex adversarial environments, unmanned swarms can perform a range of tasks such as cooperative search, jamming, attack, reconnaissance, and strike. They are characterized by high density, strong coordination and flexibility, as well as significant cost-effectiveness and robustness, thus providing economies of scale and superior mission completion capabilities. However, ensuring reliable transmission of operational data under complex electromagnetic conditions remains one of the main challenges facing unmanned swarms.

[0004] Current anti-jamming measures mostly focus on optimizing telemetry and communication systems, such as traditional methods like frequency hopping, spread spectrum, and time-frequency spatial interference suppression. These technologies are largely mature. With technological advancements and research in fields like cognitive radio, game theory, and artificial intelligence, adaptive and intelligent anti-jamming technologies have also been explored in depth. However, existing anti-jamming strategies often do not fully consider the unique attributes of individual platforms within an unmanned swarm.

[0005] Taking drones as an example, these drone swarms often operate at low altitudes and perform missions close to targets, making them easier for targets to detect and subject to targeted jamming. Closer proximity to the target means stronger received jamming signals and a more severe jamming threat. Furthermore, individual drones in a swarm are typically resource-constrained micro-platforms with limited payload, power consumption, and computing power, making it difficult to deploy advanced hardware such as phased array antennas and limiting their ability to suppress interference in the airspace.

[0006] Given the greater threats faced by unmanned swarms in the same harsh electromagnetic environments, existing anti-jamming technologies need to surpass traditional telemetry and control link anti-jamming methods. The development direction is to introduce hierarchical sensing and decision-making mechanisms. This will enhance the unmanned swarms' ability to recognize interference, enabling more proactive and flexible anti-jamming strategies to ensure high-reliability telemetry and control communication under strong interference conditions. Therefore, it is necessary to develop corresponding new anti-jamming solutions, specifically designed for the characteristics of unmanned swarms, to meet their special needs in complex electromagnetic environments. Summary of the Invention

[0007] In view of the current state of the art, the purpose of this invention is to address the limitations of unmanned swarms, which are subject to greater interference intensity and higher interference threat levels due to their proximity to targets. Therefore, this invention proposes a hierarchical, interconnected cognitive anti-interference method for unmanned swarms, thereby enhancing the anti-interference capability of unmanned swarm telemetry and control equipment in harsh electromagnetic environments. This invention, through its three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy, combined with the characteristics of the unmanned swarm platform, enhances its interference perception and cognitive capabilities, achieving proactive and flexible anti-interference effects.

[0008] The present invention employs the following technical solutions to achieve its objective:

[0009] A cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms is proposed. For each unmanned system terminal in the unmanned swarm, the degree of interference threat corresponding to each terminal is assessed based on the strength of the external electromagnetic interference signal, and the interference cognitive assessment result of the unmanned swarm is obtained. Based on the interference cognitive assessment result, a three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy is adopted to suppress the interference of the external electromagnetic interference signal, so that the measurement and control link of the unmanned swarm can be restored to normal.

[0010] The three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy includes a first-level intra-terminal passive suppression strategy, a second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy, and a third-level station-terminal joint protection strategy. The intra-terminal passive suppression strategy is executed independently by each terminal, the inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy is executed collaboratively by all terminals in the unmanned cluster to actively avoid interference, and the station-terminal joint protection strategy is executed by the telemetry and control station and the unmanned cluster through data linkage and cognitive strong interference protection processing based on the decision results of the telemetry and control station.

[0011] Specifically, in the first-level passive suppression strategy within the terminal, each terminal in the unmanned cluster is configured with a preset passive cognitive anti-interference strategy. Each terminal makes independent decisions by autonomously sensing external electromagnetic interference signals and completes passive interference suppression based on the time and frequency domain.

[0012] In the second-level inter-end autonomous protection strategy, each terminal in the unmanned cluster enables the unmanned cluster to perform distributed perception through autonomous collaboration, while the cluster head of the unmanned cluster makes centralized decisions and uses link optimization to achieve active interference avoidance.

[0013] In the third-level station-end joint protection strategy, the unmanned cluster sends the relevant data obtained by distributed sensing to the telemetry and control station. The telemetry and control station determines the corresponding decision result based on the resource status of its own telemetry and control system and sends it to the unmanned cluster. The unmanned cluster completes the cognitive strong interference protection processing based on the decision result.

[0014] Preferably, the interference perception assessment results of the unmanned swarm are divided into weak and strong levels according to a preset threshold. When the interference perception assessment result of the unmanned swarm is weak, only the first-level intra-terminal passive suppression strategy is adopted to suppress the interference of external electromagnetic interference signals through passive interference suppression, so that the measurement and control link of the unmanned swarm can be restored to normal.

[0015] When the interference perception assessment result of the unmanned swarm is strong, the swarm leader summarizes the results of distributed perception and centralized decision-making. Based on whether the uplink between the unmanned swarm and the telemetry and control station is available, it selects to adopt the second-level inter-end autonomous protection strategy or the third-level station-end joint protection strategy. After the corresponding strategy is executed, it judges whether the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the preset requirements, thereby completing the recovery of the telemetry and control link or re-making anti-interference decisions.

[0016] Furthermore, in the first-level passive suppression strategy, all terminals in the unmanned cluster are subject to interference below a preset threshold. Each terminal independently makes its own anti-interference decision based on the interference perception results and the performance evaluation results of the measurement and control link obtained internally, thus completing passive interference suppression.

[0017] Specifically, the process of the first-level intra-terminal passive inhibition strategy is as follows:

[0018] Each terminal in the unmanned cluster makes anti-interference decisions based on its own interference perception results and the performance evaluation results of the telemetry and control link. It selects passive protection measures that match the current external electromagnetic interference signal based on the type of external electromagnetic interference signal and its own configured passive cognitive anti-interference strategy. Passive protection measures include time domain, frequency domain and transform domain interference suppression measures.

[0019] Subsequently, each terminal, based on its own anti-interference decision-making results, performs corresponding passive interference suppression measures at the terminal baseband through passive protection means.

[0020] After the passive interference suppression measures are implemented, the terminal performs another evaluation of the telemetry and control link performance to determine the effectiveness of the passive interference suppression measures.

[0021] If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, it means that the telemetry and control link has returned to normal and the passive interference suppression has been completed. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, the anti-interference decision for the terminal will be re-made, a new passive protection method will be selected, and a new passive interference suppression processing measure will be implemented until the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the preset requirements.

[0022] Furthermore, in the second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy, all terminals in the unmanned cluster are subjected to interference exceeding a preset threshold, and all telemetry and control links between all terminals and the telemetry and control station are disconnected. At this time, the cluster leader of the unmanned cluster summarizes the interference perception results of each terminal, performs centralized anti-interference decision-making, and obtains the optimal telemetry and control link result. The cluster leader then sends the optimal telemetry and control link result to all other terminals in the unmanned cluster and the telemetry and control station. All terminals in the unmanned cluster and the telemetry and control station modify the corresponding telemetry and control link parameters based on the optimal telemetry and control link result to complete active interference avoidance.

[0023] Specifically, the process of the second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy is as follows: Each terminal in the unmanned cluster sends its own interference perception results and telemetry and control link performance evaluation results to the cluster head of the unmanned cluster. After receiving the corresponding information data, the cluster head aggregates and merges the results to obtain the overall interference situation and cluster telemetry and control link performance of the unmanned cluster.

[0024] The cluster leader of the unmanned swarm makes centralized anti-interference decisions based on the overall interference situation and the performance of the swarm's telemetry and control link. It then sends the optimized telemetry and control link results to all other terminals in the unmanned swarm and broadcasts them to the telemetry and control station. All terminals in the unmanned swarm and the telemetry and control station then implement link switching measures to rebuild the telemetry and control link based on the optimized results. Subsequently, each terminal re-evaluates its own telemetry and control link performance to determine the effectiveness of the link switching measures.

[0025] If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, it means that the telemetry and control link has returned to normal and the active interference avoidance has been completed. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, then a centralized anti-interference decision will be made again until the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the preset requirements.

[0026] Furthermore, in the third-level joint protection strategy, all terminals in the unmanned cluster are subject to interference exceeding the preset threshold, but at least one terminal still maintains a telemetry and control link with the telemetry and control station. At this time, these terminals that still maintain a telemetry and control link send the distributed sensing results of the unmanned cluster and the corresponding telemetry and control link performance evaluation results to the telemetry and control station. The telemetry and control station makes intelligent anti-interference decisions based on its own telemetry and control system resource status and obtains the decision results. The telemetry and control station sends the decision results to these terminals that still maintain a telemetry and control link, which then share them with the unmanned cluster and execute corresponding measures to complete the cognitive strong interference protection processing.

[0027] Specifically, after intelligent anti-interference decision-making, the corresponding measures for the decision results include passive interference suppression measures and link parameter reconstruction measures. Passive interference suppression measures include time-domain interference suppression, frequency-domain interference suppression, and transform-domain interference suppression. The link parameter reconstruction measures involve establishing a new telemetry and control link. The telemetry and control station determines the frequency, bandwidth, information rate, spreading code rate, modulation method, code type, and transmit power in the new telemetry and control link based on the resource status of its own telemetry and control system.

[0028] Specifically, the process of the third-level station-end joint protection strategy is as follows: Each terminal in the unmanned cluster sends its own interference perception results and telemetry and control link performance evaluation results to the telemetry and control station through the terminal that still maintains the telemetry and control link. The telemetry and control station receives the corresponding information data and then aggregates and merges the results.

[0029] Based on the interference perception results of each terminal and the performance evaluation results of the telemetry and control link, combined with the preset requirements of the telemetry and control link performance, as well as the hardware and spectrum resource usage of the telemetry and control station itself, the telemetry and control station makes intelligent anti-interference decisions and obtains corresponding protection measures that match the current external electromagnetic interference signal as the decision result. The corresponding protection measures include passive interference suppression measures and link parameter reconstruction measures. The telemetry and control station sends the obtained passive interference suppression measures or link parameter reconstruction measures to the terminals that still maintain the telemetry and control link, and then these terminals share them with the unmanned cluster. All terminals in the unmanned cluster perform interference suppression or link reconstruction under the action of the corresponding protection measures, thereby completing the cognitive strong interference protection processing.

[0030] In summary, due to the adoption of this technical solution, the beneficial effects of this invention are as follows:

[0031] The objective of this invention is to ensure that unmanned swarm telemetry and control equipment can effectively resist interference in harsh electromagnetic environments. By achieving this objective, this invention provides unmanned swarms with stable and reliable telemetry and control communication capabilities, enabling them to maintain efficient operation even under strong interference conditions.

[0032] This invention introduces a three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy. This strategy is specifically optimized for complex electromagnetic environments, enhancing the anti-interference performance of unmanned swarm telemetry and control equipment. By employing this hierarchical cognitive approach, this invention not only strengthens the perception and identification of interference signals but also achieves a more proactive and flexible anti-interference mechanism, thereby ensuring that the unmanned swarm can maintain its normal operational efficiency and achieve its mission objectives even in complex electromagnetic environments.

[0033] This invention fully utilizes the characteristics of unmanned swarm platforms to enhance the interference perception and cognitive functions of related systems. Through comprehensive analysis of internal and external information of the unmanned swarm, this invention can more accurately adjust the system's operating mode based on the current electromagnetic environment, responding to potential or actual interference threats in an optimized manner. This intelligent processing approach enables the unmanned swarm to possess higher reliability and adaptability when performing tasks.

[0034] Furthermore, this invention emphasizes the importance of station-end collaboration and combines active and passive related protection strategies to construct a comprehensive cognitive anti-interference system, effectively improving the protection level against strong interference signals. The application of this method not only strengthens the overall anti-interference capability of the unmanned swarm but also ensures the maintenance of a stable telemetry and control communication link under any circumstances, providing a solid guarantee for the successful operation of the unmanned swarm. Attached Figure Description

[0035] Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the overall process of the method of the present invention;

[0036] Figure 2 is a flowchart illustrating the first-level cognitive anti-interference strategy (intra-terminal passive suppression) in this invention;

[0037] Figure 3 is a flowchart illustrating the second-level cognitive anti-interference strategy (inter-end autonomous protection) in this invention;

[0038] Figure 4 is a flowchart illustrating the third-level cognitive anti-interference strategy (station-end joint protection) in this invention. Embodiments of the present invention

[0039] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present invention described and shown in the accompanying drawings can generally be arranged and designed in various different configurations.

[0040] Therefore, the following detailed description of the embodiments of the invention provided in the accompanying drawings is not intended to limit the scope of the claimed invention, but merely to illustrate selected embodiments of the invention. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments of the invention without inventive effort are within the scope of protection of the invention.

[0041] The core of the cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms proposed in this invention is to use a three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy to suppress external electromagnetic interference signals, thereby improving the anti-interference capability of unmanned swarm measurement and control equipment in complex electromagnetic environments.

[0042] The first-level cognitive anti-interference strategy is an in-terminal passive suppression strategy: Each terminal in the unmanned cluster uses its own internal cognitive anti-interference strategy to perform autonomous perception and rapid decision-making, and achieves passive interference suppression based on the time and frequency domain.

[0043] The second level of cognitive anti-interference strategy is the inter-end autonomous protection strategy: unmanned cluster autonomous collaboration, cluster distributed perception and centralized decision-making, and active interference avoidance through link optimization;

[0044] The third level of cognitive anti-interference strategy is a joint protection strategy between the ground station and the unmanned cluster: the cluster provides distributed perception and the station makes precise decisions, and the combination of active and passive approaches achieves strong cognitive interference protection.

[0045] This invention combines the characteristics of unmanned swarm platforms and the dynamic changes in the telemetry and control link. The three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy and its corresponding decision-making process can further enhance the interference perception and cognition capabilities of unmanned swarms, achieve rapid and stable anti-interference strategy selection and proactive and flexible anti-interference effects, and improve the anti-interference capability of unmanned swarm telemetry and control equipment in complex electromagnetic environments.

[0046] The following will describe in detail the method of the present invention from various embodiments, wherein Embodiment 1 is an overview of the overall implementation process of the method of the present invention.

[0047] Example 1

[0048] Figure 1 illustrates a hierarchical, interactive cognitive anti-interference method for unmanned swarms, employing a three-tiered cognitive anti-interference strategy. The unmanned swarm automatically selects three anti-interference strategies—intra-terminal passive suppression, inter-terminal autonomous protection, and station-end joint protection—based on interference perception results from each terminal and link performance evaluation results, achieving efficient and reliable interference protection. The specific implementation steps are as follows:

[0049] S1: Interference perception and link performance assessment for each terminal. Each terminal in the unmanned cluster receives external electromagnetic interference signals, completes interference detection, identification, and parameter analysis, and performs link performance assessment based on parameters such as the received link lock status and bit error rate to obtain the degree of interference threat to the terminal.

[0050] S2: Determine the level of interference threat to the terminal. If the level of interference threat to the terminal is "weak", proceed to step S3; if the level of interference threat to the terminal is "strong", proceed to step S4.

[0051] S3: Intra-terminal passive suppression. Each terminal independently makes anti-interference decisions based on interference perception results and link performance evaluation results, completes passive interference suppression, and restores the telemetry and control link to normal.

[0052] S4: Result Reporting to Cluster Head. Each terminal sends the interference perception and link assessment results to the cluster head of the unmanned cluster. The cluster head is a pre-defined individual in the unmanned cluster used to coordinate and manage the various terminals. It is also an unmanned system terminal and can be designated as the head node or leader of the unmanned cluster according to the actual situation.

[0053] S5: The cluster head completes the aggregation of perception results and link evaluation results. After receiving the interference perception and link performance evaluation results from each terminal, the cluster head of the unmanned cluster aggregates and fuses the results to obtain the overall interference situation and cluster link performance of the unmanned cluster.

[0054] S6: Determine whether the cluster link performance meets the preset requirements. If the cluster link performance meets the preset requirements, proceed to step S12; if the cluster link performance still does not meet the preset requirements, proceed to step S7.

[0055] S7: Determine if the cluster uplink is available. Based on the link performance evaluation results sent by each terminal, determine the availability of the uplink telemetry and control link between each terminal in the unmanned cluster and the telemetry and control station; if there is an available telemetry and control link, proceed to step S9; if the telemetry and control links of all terminals in the unmanned cluster are unavailable, proceed to step S8.

[0056] S8: Inter-terminal autonomous protection. The cluster leader of the unmanned swarm makes centralized anti-interference decisions based on the distributed sensing results, obtains the link optimization results, and sends the link optimization results to other terminals and telemetry stations within the unmanned swarm. After that, all terminals and telemetry stations simultaneously modify the link parameters.

[0057] S9: Joint protection between station and terminal. The unmanned cluster sends the distributed sensing results and link performance evaluation results to the telemetry and control station. The telemetry and control station performs a comprehensive analysis based on the resource status of the telemetry and control system and makes intelligent anti-interference decisions to obtain the decision results of passive interference suppression or active link parameter adjustment. The decision results are then sent to the unmanned cluster, which performs cognitive strong interference protection processing based on the decision results.

[0058] S10: Determine if there has been no response for an extended period. If, after implementing cognitive interference protection, none of the terminals at the telemetry and control station or the unmanned cluster respond within a preset time, proceed to step S11; if a normal telemetry and control operation response occurs, proceed to step S12.

[0059] S11: The telemetry and control station and all terminals are loaded with predetermined parameters. When the telemetry and control station or any terminal in the unmanned cluster does not respond for a long time, it is determined that the telemetry and control link between the telemetry and control station and all terminals in the unmanned cluster has been disconnected. At this time, the telemetry and control station and each terminal are loaded with the same pre-agreed telemetry and control link parameters, and the initial link recovery measures are executed. After the telemetry and control link is restored, decision optimization is performed.

[0060] S12: Telemetry and control link restored. After the unmanned cluster completes the three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy, the telemetry and control link returns to normal.

[0061] Example 2

[0062] Based on Example 1, this example provides a detailed description of the first-level intra-terminal passive suppression strategy. This strategy employs passive suppression when interference from any terminal within the unmanned cluster is weak, thereby restoring the corresponding telemetry and control link without affecting other terminals in the unmanned cluster. The specific process can be seen in Figure 2, where the dashed box represents an overview of the overall process in Example 1. The following is a detailed description of step S3.

[0063] S31: Terminal Anti-interference Decision. Each terminal in the unmanned swarm makes anti-interference decisions based on the interference perception results and the performance evaluation results of the telemetry and control link; depending on the type of interference, it automatically selects the most suitable passive protection method that matches the current external electromagnetic interference signal, which may include various interference suppression methods such as time domain, frequency domain and transform domain.

[0064] S32: Interference Suppression Processing. Each terminal, based on its own anti-interference decision-making, executes corresponding passive interference suppression processing measures at the terminal baseband through passive protection means.

[0065] S33: Measurement and Control Link Performance Evaluation. After implementing passive interference suppression measures, each terminal performs another measurement and control link performance evaluation to determine the effectiveness of the passive interference suppression measures.

[0066] S34: Determine whether the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the requirements. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, proceed to step S35; if the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, return to step S31 and re-perform the anti-interference decision for the terminal.

[0067] S35: Telemetry and control link restored. At this point, the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, completing the passive suppression of external electromagnetic interference within the terminal, and the link has returned to normal.

[0068] Example 3

[0069] Based on any of the above embodiments, this embodiment provides a detailed description of the second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy. This strategy employs inter-terminal autonomous protection when the unmanned cluster is subjected to strong interference, and all terminals are affected, causing the telemetry and control link to disconnect. It restores the telemetry and control link through link optimization. Refer to Figure 3 for a detailed flowchart. The dashed box in Figure 3 represents an overview of the overall process in Embodiment 1. The following is a detailed description of step S8.

[0070] S81: Cluster Head Anti-interference Decision. After each terminal in the unmanned cluster completes interference perception and telemetry link performance evaluation, it reports to the cluster head. The cluster head then merges and aggregates the interference perception results and the telemetry link performance evaluation results. In this embodiment, the cluster head makes centralized anti-interference decisions based on the overall interference situation of the unmanned cluster. At this time, the unmanned cluster is under strong interference. Based on parameters such as interference intensity, interference frequency band, and interference type, the cluster head automatically selects the best telemetry link from the telemetry link library to avoid the interference frequency band and outputs the best telemetry link code. Since the unmanned cluster has limited computing and storage resources, the link optimization decision space is small, which can improve the speed and success rate of the cluster head's decision.

[0071] S82: Broadcasting and distributing link optimization results to telemetry and control stations. After completing centralized anti-interference decision-making, the cluster head sends the optimal telemetry and control link code obtained from the decision to other terminals through the shared collaborative link within the unmanned cluster, and also sends it to the telemetry and control stations via broadcast.

[0072] S83: All terminals and telemetry and control stations rebuild the link. After receiving and confirming the best telemetry and control link code, other terminals and telemetry and control stations in the unmanned cluster immediately switch the currently interfered telemetry and control link to the preferred telemetry and control link, completing the reconstruction of the new telemetry and control link.

[0073] S84: Measurement and Control Link Performance Evaluation. After implementing the above link switching measures, each terminal performs another measurement and control link performance evaluation to determine the effectiveness of inter-terminal autonomous protection.

[0074] S85: Determine whether the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the requirements. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, proceed to step S86; if the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, return to step S81 and re-perform the centralized anti-interference decision of the cluster head.

[0075] S86: Telemetry and control link restored. At this point, the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, completing the inter-end autonomous protection against external electromagnetic interference, and the link has returned to normal.

[0076] Example 4

[0077] Based on any of the above embodiments, this embodiment provides a detailed description of the third-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy. This strategy addresses situations where the unmanned cluster experiences strong interference, but only some terminals are affected, leading to a disconnection of the telemetry and control link. It employs a joint station-end protection approach, combining distributed cluster sensing and precise station-end decision-making with a combination of active and passive methods to achieve cognitive interference protection. Refer to Figure 4 for a detailed flowchart; the dashed box in Figure 4 represents an overview of the overall process in Embodiment 1. The following is a detailed description of step S9.

[0078] S91: Sensing and link assessment results are sent to the telemetry and control station. The unmanned swarm will send the interference sensing results and telemetry and control link performance assessment results of each terminal to the telemetry and control station.

[0079] S92: The telemetry and control station completes the aggregation of perception and link assessment results. The telemetry and control station receives and confirms the interference perception results and telemetry and control link performance assessment results corresponding to each terminal, and aggregates and fuses the corresponding information data to obtain the overall interference situation and telemetry and control link status of the unmanned swarm.

[0080] S93: Intelligent Anti-interference Decision-Making at the Telemetry and Control Station. Based on the interference perception results of each terminal and the performance evaluation results of the telemetry and control link, combined with the preset requirements for the performance of the telemetry and control link, as well as the hardware and spectrum resource usage of the telemetry and control station itself, the telemetry and control station uses decision-making methods such as deep reinforcement learning to make intelligent anti-interference decisions, and derives the most suitable and matching protection measures for the current external electromagnetic interference signal as the decision result.

[0081] In this embodiment, the measures corresponding to the decision result include passive interference suppression measures and link parameter reconstruction measures; passive interference suppression measures include time-domain interference suppression, frequency-domain interference suppression and transform-domain interference suppression; the link parameter reconstruction measures are to establish a new telemetry and control link, and the telemetry and control station determines the frequency, bandwidth, information rate, spreading code rate, modulation method, code type and transmit power in the new telemetry and control link based on its own telemetry and control system resource status.

[0082] S94: Determine the anti-interference measures. If the decision result obtained by the intelligent anti-interference decision corresponds to a passive interference suppression measure, proceed to step S95; if the decision result obtained by the intelligent anti-interference decision corresponds to a link parameter reconstruction measure, proceed to step S97.

[0083] S95: Passive interference suppression measures are reported to the unmanned cluster. The telemetry and control station sends the decision results of the corresponding passive interference suppression measures to the unmanned cluster, which then sends them to each terminal through its internal shared and collaborative link.

[0084] S96: The terminal activates passive interference suppression measures. After receiving and confirming the decision result, each terminal begins to implement passive interference suppression measures, and then proceeds to step S99.

[0085] S97: Link parameter reconfiguration measures are reported to the unmanned cluster. The telemetry and control station sends the decision results of the corresponding link parameter reconfiguration measures to the unmanned cluster, which then sends them to each terminal through its internal shared collaborative link.

[0086] S98: Terminals and telemetry stations rebuild the telemetry and control link. After receiving and confirming the decision results, each terminal modifies the telemetry and control link parameters in the radio frequency and baseband, and rebuilds the telemetry and control link.

[0087] S99: Measurement and Control Link Performance Evaluation. After performing the above-mentioned cognitive strong interference protection process, each terminal performs another measurement and control link performance evaluation to determine the effectiveness of the joint protection at the station end.

[0088] S910: Determine whether the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the requirements. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, proceed to step S911; if the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, return to step S91 and re-perform the intelligent anti-interference decision of the telemetry and control station in the joint protection of the station end.

[0089] S911: Telemetry and control link restored. At this point, the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, completing the joint protection against external electromagnetic interference at the station end, and the link has returned to normal.

Claims

1. A cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned clusters, characterized in that: For each unmanned system terminal in the unmanned swarm, the degree of interference threat to each terminal is assessed based on the strength of the external electromagnetic interference signal, and the interference cognitive assessment result of the unmanned swarm is obtained. Based on the interference cognitive assessment result, a three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy is adopted to suppress the interference of external electromagnetic interference signals, so that the telemetry and control link of the unmanned swarm can be restored to normal. The three-level cognitive anti-interference strategy includes a first-level intra-terminal passive suppression strategy, a second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy, and a third-level station-terminal joint protection strategy. The intra-terminal passive suppression strategy is executed independently by each terminal, the inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy is executed collaboratively by all terminals in the unmanned cluster to actively avoid interference, and the station-terminal joint protection strategy is executed by the telemetry and control station and the unmanned cluster through data linkage and cognitive strong interference protection processing based on the decision results of the telemetry and control station.

2. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the first-level intra-terminal passive suppression strategy, each terminal in the unmanned cluster is equipped with a preset passive cognitive anti-interference strategy. Each terminal makes independent decisions by autonomously sensing external electromagnetic interference signals and completes passive interference suppression based on the time and frequency domain. In the second-level inter-end autonomous protection strategy, each terminal in the unmanned cluster enables the unmanned cluster to perform distributed perception through autonomous collaboration, while the cluster head of the unmanned cluster makes centralized decisions and uses link optimization to achieve active interference avoidance. In the third-level station-end joint protection strategy, the unmanned cluster sends the relevant data obtained by distributed sensing to the telemetry and control station. The telemetry and control station determines the corresponding decision result based on the resource status of its own telemetry and control system and sends it to the unmanned cluster. The unmanned cluster completes the cognitive strong interference protection processing based on the decision result.

3. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 2, characterized in that: The interference perception assessment results of the unmanned swarm are divided into weak and strong levels based on preset thresholds. When the interference perception assessment result of the unmanned swarm is weak, only the first-level intra-terminal passive suppression strategy is adopted to suppress the interference of external electromagnetic interference signals through passive interference suppression, so that the measurement and control link of the unmanned swarm can be restored to normal. When the interference perception assessment result of the unmanned swarm is strong, the swarm leader summarizes the results of distributed perception and centralized decision-making. Based on whether the uplink between the unmanned swarm and the telemetry and control station is available, it selects to adopt the second-level inter-end autonomous protection strategy or the third-level station-end joint protection strategy. After the corresponding strategy is executed, it judges whether the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the preset requirements, thereby completing the recovery of the telemetry and control link or re-making anti-interference decisions.

4. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 3, characterized in that: In the first-level passive suppression strategy, all terminals in the unmanned cluster are subject to interference below a preset threshold. Each terminal independently makes its own anti-interference decision based on the interference perception results and the performance evaluation results of the measurement and control link, thus completing passive interference suppression.

5. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 4, characterized in that, The process of the first-level intraterminal passive suppression strategy is as follows: Each terminal in the unmanned cluster makes anti-interference decisions based on its own interference perception results and the performance evaluation results of the telemetry and control link. It selects passive protection measures that match the current external electromagnetic interference signal based on the type of external electromagnetic interference signal and its own configured passive cognitive anti-interference strategy. Passive protection measures include time domain, frequency domain and transform domain interference suppression measures. Subsequently, each terminal, based on its own anti-interference decision-making results, performs corresponding passive interference suppression measures at the terminal baseband through passive protection means. After the passive interference suppression measures are implemented, the terminal performs another evaluation of the telemetry and control link performance to determine the effectiveness of the passive interference suppression measures. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link shows that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, it means that the telemetry and control link has returned to normal and passive interference suppression has been completed. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, the anti-interference decision for the terminal will be re-made, new passive protection methods will be selected, and new passive interference suppression measures will be implemented until the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the preset requirements.

6. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 3, characterized in that: In the second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy, all terminals in the unmanned cluster are subjected to interference exceeding the preset threshold, and the telemetry and control links between all terminals and the telemetry and control station are disconnected. At this time, the cluster leader of the unmanned cluster summarizes the interference perception results of each terminal, performs centralized anti-interference decision-making, and obtains the optimal telemetry and control link result. The cluster leader then sends the optimal telemetry and control link result to all other terminals in the unmanned cluster and the telemetry and control station. Based on the optimal telemetry and control link result, all terminals in the unmanned cluster and the telemetry and control station modify the corresponding telemetry and control link parameters to complete active interference avoidance.

7. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 6, characterized in that, The second-level inter-terminal autonomous protection strategy is as follows: Each terminal in the unmanned cluster sends its own interference perception results and telemetry and control link performance evaluation results to the cluster head of the unmanned cluster. After receiving the corresponding information data, the cluster head aggregates and merges the results to obtain the overall interference situation and cluster telemetry and control link performance of the unmanned cluster. The cluster leader of the unmanned swarm makes centralized anti-interference decisions based on the overall interference situation and the performance of the cluster telemetry and control link. It then sends the optimized telemetry and control link results to all other terminals in the unmanned swarm and broadcasts the optimized telemetry and control link results to the telemetry and control station. Based on the optimal results of the telemetry and control link, all terminals and telemetry and control stations of the unmanned swarm execute link switching measures to rebuild the telemetry and control link; subsequently, each terminal performs its own telemetry and control link performance evaluation again to determine the effectiveness of the link switching measures. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link shows that the performance of the telemetry and control link has met the preset requirements, it means that the telemetry and control link has returned to normal and the active interference avoidance has been completed. If the performance evaluation of the telemetry and control link indicates that the performance of the telemetry and control link still does not meet the preset requirements, then a centralized anti-interference decision will be made again until the performance of the telemetry and control link meets the preset requirements.

8. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 3, characterized in that: In the third-level joint protection strategy, all terminals in the unmanned cluster are subject to interference exceeding the preset threshold, but at least one terminal still maintains a telemetry and control link with the telemetry and control station. At this time, these terminals that still maintain a telemetry and control link send the distributed sensing results of the unmanned cluster and the corresponding telemetry and control link performance evaluation results to the telemetry and control station. The telemetry and control station makes intelligent anti-interference decisions based on its own telemetry and control system resource status and obtains the decision results. The telemetry and control station sends the decision results to these terminals that still maintain a telemetry and control link, which then share them with the unmanned cluster and execute corresponding measures to complete the cognitive strong interference protection processing.

9. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 8, characterized in that: After intelligent anti-interference decision-making, the corresponding measures for the decision results include passive interference suppression measures and link parameter reconstruction measures. Passive interference suppression measures include time-domain interference suppression, frequency-domain interference suppression, and transform-domain interference suppression. The link parameter reconstruction measures involve establishing a new telemetry and control link. The telemetry and control station determines the frequency, bandwidth, information rate, spreading code rate, modulation method, code type, and transmit power in the new telemetry and control link based on the resource status of its own telemetry and control system.

10. The cognitive anti-interference method for hierarchical linkage of unmanned swarms according to claim 8, characterized in that, The process of the third-level station-end joint protection strategy is as follows: Each terminal in the unmanned cluster sends its own interference perception results and telemetry and control link performance evaluation results to the telemetry and control station through the terminal that still maintains the telemetry and control link. The telemetry and control station receives the corresponding information data and then performs result aggregation and fusion. Based on the interference perception results of each terminal and the performance evaluation results of the telemetry and control link, combined with the preset requirements of the telemetry and control link performance, as well as the hardware and spectrum resource usage of the telemetry and control station itself, the telemetry and control station makes intelligent anti-interference decisions and obtains corresponding protection measures that match the current external electromagnetic interference signal as the decision result. The corresponding protection measures include passive interference suppression measures and link parameter reconstruction measures. The telemetry and control station sends the obtained passive interference suppression measures or link parameter reconstruction measures to the terminals that still maintain the telemetry and control link, and then these terminals share them with the unmanned cluster. All terminals in the unmanned cluster perform interference suppression or link reconstruction under the action of the corresponding protection measures, thereby completing the cognitive strong interference protection processing.

Images