Terminal Airspace Risk Prediction via Multi-Source Data Integration

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current aviation technologies lack a predictive capability to identify and mitigate risks in terminal airspace areas around airports, where weather, traffic volume, and infrastructure outages combine to pose significant operational risks, due to the complexity of the environment and the variability of data availability.

Innovation Solution

A software tool that aggregates data from multiple sources and time intervals using predictive algorithms to forecast the terminal airspace risk category, providing aviation professionals with interactive panes for visual insights and alerts to mitigate potential risks, including traffic forecasts, weather conditions, and infrastructure status.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If multiple risk factors are monitored and integrated into a comprehensive risk prediction system, then the reliability of terminal airspace risk assessment is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverisk assessment reliabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the complex risk assessment task into distinct functional modules: a data acquisition module that collects individual risk factors (weather, traffic, infrastructure), a data integration module that aggregates these factors, and a prediction module that generates risk category forecasts. This segmentation allows each module to handle specific aspects of the problem independently, improving reliability while managing complexity through modular design.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The risk prediction system is designed as a universal platform that can monitor and integrate multiple types of risk factors (weather conditions, traffic volume, infrastructure status) through a common data processing framework. This multi-functional approach allows the same system architecture to handle diverse data sources and risk categories, improving assessment reliability without proportionally increasing system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive data from multiple sources and time intervals is processed, then the measurement precision of risk factors is improved, but the loss of time in data processing increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverisk factor measurement precisionVSAvoiddata processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-processing and organizing data from multiple sources before the actual risk assessment is needed. Data acquisition modules continuously collect and validate risk factor data in advance, and the system pre-integrates these data streams so that when risk prediction is required, the processing time is minimized while maintaining high measurement precision through comprehensive data aggregation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system maintains continuous data acquisition and processing operations, ensuring that risk factor measurements are continuously updated from multiple sources. This continuous action allows the system to accumulate precise measurements over time while processing data in real-time streams, thereby improving measurement precision without significant time loss through efficient continuous processing rather than batch operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

3Productivity

If predictive algorithms forecast future risk categories, then the productivity of risk management is improved, but the difficulty of detecting and measuring risk factors increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverisk management productivityVSAvoidrisk factor detection difficulty
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where prediction results are continuously monitored and used to refine the detection and measurement of risk factors. The predictive algorithms generate risk category forecasts that feed back into the data acquisition and processing modules, improving the detection capabilities for future assessments. This feedback loop enhances risk management productivity by learning from past predictions while systematically improving the difficulty of detecting and measuring underlying risk factors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces intermediary processing layers that mediate between raw risk factor data and the predictive algorithms. These intermediaries include data normalization modules, feature extraction components, and aggregation functions that transform complex, difficult-to-measure risk factors into standardized inputs suitable for prediction. This intermediary approach enables productive forecasting while managing the difficulty of detecting and measuring diverse risk factors through systematic data transformation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS11257381B2System and method to simultaneously display an airport status snapshot pane and a primary map pane to clearly indicate terminal airspace risk category
Publication Date: 2022.02.22 ROBUST ANALYTICS INC
  • US11257381B2 patent drawing
  • US11257381B2 patent drawing
  • US11257381B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system, a method, and a computer program embodied on a non-transitory computer-readable medium, the program configured to cause at least one processor to perform steps including gathering observations and forecasts of a plurality of aviation environmental and operational data of a terminal airspace, independently transforming the observations and forecasts into respective terminal airspace risk factors; integrating the terminal airspace risk factors into operational time periods; weighting the integrated terminal airspace risk factors into an overall airspace risk score for each operational time period; categorizing the overall airspace risk score into a terminal airspace risk category based upon at least one predetermined risk score threshold; and displaying the risk categories and selected underlying risk factors data on a map with a plurality of display panes.