CN108377163B - Multi-satellite online collaboration method based on asynchronous communication - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention discloses a multi-satellite online cooperation method based on asynchronous communication, which adopts an improved consistency bundle algorithm based on synchronous communication, aims at the complex combination optimization problem of multi-satellite online cooperation task scheduling under communication constraint, and is oriented to a distributed architecture.

Description

Multi-satellite online collaboration method based on asynchronous communication

Technical Field

The invention relates to the technical field of satellites, in particular to a multi-satellite online collaboration method based on asynchronous communication.

Background

With the improvement of the on-satellite load detection capability and the image processing capability, the earth observation satellite can find a valuable observation target on the satellite and generate a further observation task request (generally, an emergency observation task with higher profit or priority level), and can also receive observation task requests (emergency observation task requests) transmitted by other satellite communications, wherein the observation task requests are dynamically and randomly arrived and have high timeliness requirements and need to be solved on line, and under the condition of multi-satellite (especially isomorphic multi-satellite), a multi-satellite on-line cooperative scheduling mechanism is needed for cooperative scheduling.

Disclosure of Invention

The invention aims to provide a multi-satellite online cooperation method based on asynchronous communication to realize isomorphic multi-satellite online cooperation, and particularly better deal with emergency observation tasks.

In order to achieve the above object, the present invention provides an asynchronous communication-based multi-satellite online collaboration method, wherein the multi-satellite adopts a decentralized architecture, each earth observation satellite LEO is an autonomous satellite, and has the same intelligent level in the architecture without level difference, the autonomous satellite uses the geostationary orbit communication satellite as a relay node for communication, and the geostationary orbit communication satellite plays a role of a coordinator and is responsible for predicting an asynchronous communication loop, for the emergency observation task, each autonomous satellite is subjected to a cyclic process of 'autonomous planning and scheduling-communication interaction-cooperative decision', wherein each autonomous satellite not only updates its own mission plan, but also maintains mission plans of other autonomous satellites in the architecture, the multi-satellite online cooperation method based on asynchronous communication adopts an asynchronous consistency bundle algorithm based on asynchronous communication.

Preferably, the asynchronous coherence bundle algorithm based on asynchronous communication comprises: an asynchronous communication loop prediction stage, a bundle construction stage and a consistency construction stage, wherein in the asynchronous communication loop prediction stage, an earth observation satellite shares an information vector thereof to an earth stationary orbit communication satellite immediately after dispatching a new batch of emergency observation tasks, the earth stationary orbit communication satellite predicts an asynchronous communication loop ACL,

for each earth observation satellite, during the ACL's available time interval, when the initiator or response isWhen the task bundle of the user changes, asynchronous sharing feedback interaction is executed on the ACL, the time stamps of the sharing downlink and the feedback uplink are equal, and t_DS≈t_UFIn each asynchronous sharing feedback interaction, a bundle construction phase and a consistency construction phase are carried out, wherein the asynchronous sharing feedback interaction is triggered and generated on an available asynchronous communication loop, in the asynchronous sharing feedback interaction, four timestamps are provided in total, the four timestamps comprise a sharing uplink, a sharing downlink, a feedback uplink and a feedback downlink,

the asynchronous communication loop ACL is composed of two or three independent asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL, and the description form of ASCL is a multiple element group < ID, I, R, ES, LF >)_ASCL，

-the ID is an identifier;

i is the communication initiator number, i.e. the first one shares its information;

-R is the number of the communication responder receiving and sharing the information;

ES is the earliest start time of the asynchronous sub-communication loop;

LF is the latest end time of the asynchronous sub-communication loop,

i or R is a relay node, when an LEO is determined to be I, R is set as the relay node, otherwise, when I is the relay node, R is set as the LEO,

the asynchronous communication loop ACL is formed by two independent asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL in the case where the asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL have overlapping time intervals, and is formed by three independent asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL in the case where the asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL do not have overlapping time intervals.

Preferably, in the bundle construction stage, each earth observation satellite continuously adds tasks into the task bundle in a sequential greedy manner until no task can be added any more, the tasks in the task bundle are arranged according to the sequentially added sequence, the tasks in the task plan are ordered according to the corresponding actual starting time, in the bundle construction stage, each earth observation satellite constructs a respective corresponding task bundle and updates along with the progress of the scheduling process, for each available task not currently in the task bundle, the earth observation satellite compares the income value thereof with the task score in the current bid winning vector, if the income value is larger, the new task winning score is reserved, for the unscheduled task set, the task with the highest score is selected from the earth observation satellites and added into the task bundle, the recursive process of bundle construction continues until the task bundle has reached its capacity limit, or no more tasks can be added to the task bundle, i.e., the geostationary satellite can no longer perform the remaining tasks better than other geostationary satellites.

Preferably, < ID in two asynchronous sub-communication loops₁,I₁,R₁,ES₁,LF₁＞_ASCLAnd < ID₂,I₂,R₂,ES₂,LF₂＞_ASCLIn the case where the asynchronous communication loop is formed, in the two asynchronous sub-communication loops, the following five correlation relationships exist:

both I and R are LEO satellites, ACL initiator I is the initiator I of the previous ASCL₁At the same time

ACL responder R is a responder R of the latter ASCL₂；

I＝I₁

R＝R₂

Responder R of the previous ASCL₁And initiator I of the latter ASCL₂Are all communication relay nodes;

when the communication relay nodes are communicated with each other, the relay nodes corresponding to the two ASCL can be different, otherwise, the corresponding relay nodes are the same;

ES_USand LF_USRepresenting a shared uplink communication time window of the ACL;

ES_US＝ES₁

LF_US＝min{LF₁,LF₂}

ES_US≤LF_US

ES_DS-UFand LF_DS-UFRepresenting a shared downlink-feedback uplink communication time window of the ACL;

ES_DS-UF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DS-UF＝LF₂

ES_DS-UF≤LF_DS-UF

ES_DFand LF_DFA feedback downlink communication time window representing an ACL;

ES_DF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DF＝LF₁

ES_DF≤LF_DF。

preferably, < ID in three asynchronous sub-communication loops₁,I₁,R₁,ES₁,LF₁＞_ASCL，＜ID₂,I₂,R₂,ES₂,LF₂＞_ASCLAnd < ID₃,I₃,R₃,ES₃,LF₃＞_ASCLIn the case where the asynchronous communication loop is formed, the following correlation exists among the three asynchronous sub-communication loops:

both I and R are LEO satellites, and the initiator I of the ACL is the initiator I of the first ASCL₁While the responder R is the responder R of the last ASCL₃，

I＝I₁

R＝R₃

Initiator I of the first ASCL₁Responder R with the last ASCL₃And the same, to form a complete communication loop,

I₁＝R₃

responder R of first ASCL₁And initiator I of the last two ASCL₂And I₃All are communication relay nodes, when the relay nodes are communicated with each other, the corresponding relay nodes can be different, otherwise, the relay nodes are the same relay node,

ES_USand LF_USRepresenting a shared upstream communication time window of the ACL,

ES_US＝ES₁

LF_US＝min{LF₁,LF₂}

ES_US≤LF_US

ES_DS-UFand LF_DS-UFA shared downstream-feedback upstream communication time window representing an ACL,

ES_DS-UF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DS-UF＝LF₂

ES_DS-UF≤LF_DS-UF

ES_DFand LF_DFA feedback downlink communication time window representing the ACL,

ES_DF＝max{ES₂,ES₃}

LF_DF＝LF₃

ES_DF≤LF_DF。

preferably, the responder takes one of the following five actions:

1) update & re-share: the responder updates the winner list, the winning bid list and the winning time vector according to the information sent by the sender, and then shares the update;

2) discard & re-share: the responder does not change the information state of the responder and then shares the winner information determined by the responder;

3) discard & no more share: the responder does not change the information state of the responder and does not share the information, and the responder is applied to the condition that the received information is consistent with the existing information;

4) reset & re-share: the responder clears the winner and the winner value and then shares the originally received message again, so that confusion is eliminated;

5) update time & re-share: the responder is the winner and, upon receiving the message, updates its winning generation timestamp to the current time to confirm that it still considers itself to be the winner.

Preferably, in responding to a message sent from an earth observation satellite as the sender, the operational decision rules adopted by the earth observation satellite as the responder for the emergency mission oj are as follows,

local decision rule when receiving message under asynchronous communication

Drawings

Fig. 1 is a block diagram of a decentralized multi-satellite collaboration architecture.

Fig. 2 is an information flow diagram in a decentralized multi-star collaboration architecture.

Fig. 3 is a general conceptual diagram of online co-scheduling solution over the entire scheduling interval.

Fig. 4 is a schematic diagram of the communication between a relay node and a LEO satellite.

Fig. 5a and 5b are schematic diagrams of an asynchronous communication loop.

Fig. 6 shows the communication available between the space and ground segments.

Fig. 7 a-7 c are m-CBBA algorithm results for non-interconnected and interconnected cases between GEO, where fig. 7a shows total revenue, fig. 7b shows percentage of contingency tasks successfully scheduled, and fig. 7c shows total number of communications.

Fig. 8 a-8 c are the results of the algorithms under the task space distribution U (-45,45) and different rolling scheduling periods, where fig. 8a shows the total profit, fig. 8b shows the percentage of successful scheduling of the contingent task, and fig. 8c shows the total number of communications.

Detailed Description

Embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. The earth observation satellite LEO in the invention is an autonomous agent (autonomous satellite), and has the following characteristics: autonomous perception, autonomous planning scheduling and autonomous execution. The aspects of autonomy include precise attitude determination, orbit determination, attitude sensor/driver and load calibration, attitude control, orbit maneuver, state monitoring and predictive analysis, fault detection, diagnosis, isolation and repair, predictive modeling (in planning and scheduling, state monitoring and analysis, orbit determination and maintenance, etc., the support of a predictive model is needed, such as ephemeris, solar strength, etc.), task planning and scheduling, load control and configuration, data storage and communication, image data processing, etc. For example, the conforming emergency task can be autonomously generated by awareness.

The method of the invention is particularly suitable for earth observation satellite systems with a decentralized architecture (also called a decentralized cooperative architecture). In a decentralized collaborative architecture, each autonomous satellite has the same level of intelligence, there is no level difference, and the entire organization is flat and fully distributed. Meanwhile, all autonomous satellites have communication interaction links. Therefore, the architecture is highly adaptive and reliable, wherein each autonomous satellite can make intelligent decisions on the whole system without transferring it to other autonomous satellites for decisions, and is complex requiring tight inter-satellite communication. As can be seen, each satellite is at intelligent level I₁And the tasks can be completed in a mutual cooperation manner. In the distributed multi-satellite cooperative architecture, only an intelligent level is positioned at I₁As shown in fig. 1.

Each satellite individual needs to go through a cyclic process of 'autonomous planning and scheduling-communication interaction-cooperative decision', wherein the intelligent level I₁The five major autonomic functions involved include:

1) planning and scheduling

Planning and scheduling are divided into two levels: this star and other stars. Each satellite needs to update its own mission plan and also needs to maintain mission plans of other satellites.

The star planning and scheduling refers to selecting tasks from an observation task set to be executed and generating an observation task sequence so as to maximize an objective function. And the planning and scheduling module sends the task plan and the resource information of the planning and scheduling module to the cooperative decision-making module. And when a cooperative decision result fed back by the cooperative decision module is received, updating the task plan of the cooperative decision module according to the cooperative decision result.

The other-satellite planning and scheduling refers to re-planning and scheduling the task set sent by the cooperative decision module, the other-satellite resource information and the local satellite and other-satellite task plan after conflict resolution respectively, and feeding back the other-satellite task plan after re-planning and scheduling to the cooperative decision module.

2) Execute

And generating a satellite action sequence and corresponding resource arrangement according to the capacity, state and performance of the on-satellite load and the task plan obtained by the planning and scheduling module, and sending executable action instructions to each on-satellite device. After the task execution is completed, the image data is sent to the data processing module.

3) Data processing

And aiming at the acquired image, performing target detection, extraction and positioning so as to screen a suspicious target point, and further acquiring multi-dimensional characteristics (such as azimuth angle, shape size and the like) of the suspicious target point. And if the suspicious target is found, generating a new task demand and sending the new task demand to the cooperative decision module.

4) Collaborative decision making

When receiving task execution intents transmitted by other stars, comparing the same task requirements with the task execution intents generated by the star, performing task conflict resolution according to a certain collaborative strategy, and sending task sets after conflict resolution, resource information of the other stars and task plans of the star and the other stars to a planning and scheduling module. And feeding back the task plan of other stars, which is transmitted by the planning and scheduling module, to the corresponding other stars as a collaborative decision result.

5) Communication interaction

The communication interaction module selects a time point according to a communication mechanism to carry out communication interaction, packages and sends out task demand information to be planned and scheduled, a cooperative decision result, an execution intention, resource information, a task plan and the like, and receives information packets transmitted by other stars.

The flow of information between autonomous satellites refers to the data required to perform a mission action and the messages required to trigger the mission requirements. Fig. 2 shows an information flow diagram in a decentralized collaborative architecture, where "M" denotes messages and "D" denotes data. The following table lists a detailed description of each message and data in the decentralized collaborative architecture.

Detailed description form for messages and data in an information flow graph

The distributed earth observation satellite system has unique orbit characteristics and intermittent communication characteristics, more robot systems and multi-unmanned aerial vehicle systems are more strictly restricted in communication, and the communication connectivity in the system can not be guaranteed in real time. Therefore, in a dynamic task environment, in the face of limited on-satellite computing power and time-varying communication constraints, an efficient and applicable multi-satellite online cooperative scheduling mechanism and algorithm are designed, balance is achieved between system efficiency and communication cost, and the method is a very challenging problem.

A distributed earth observation satellite system is a collection of satellites located in different orbits and is tasked with performing observation imaging of various hot spot areas on the earth's surface, such as hot spots corresponding to volcanic activity or forest fires. Each earth observation satellite is provided with a single imaging load, and the central view field line of the camera can swing left and right. The roll activity requires a duration limit, so that a task request to observe too close an activity cannot be fulfilled by the same satellite. In addition, the satellite is equipped with anomaly detection equipment, discovers hot events, and generates observation task requests on the satellite.

The online arrival of observation task requests comes primarily from three main sources: tasks generated by satellites in the constellation, tasks generated and transmitted by other satellites in the constellation and emergency upper notes of ground stations.

Earth observation satellites are in low orbit and inter-satellite links are not always available. For example, RapidEye is a commercial multispectral earth observation satellite project from RapidEye AG of blandenburg, germany, comprising a satellite constellation consisting of five small satellites. Five RapidEye geostationary satellites are deployed on the same sun-synchronized orbit at a height of 630 km and are placed equidistantly to ensure consistent imaging conditions and short revisit intervals. The satellites are spaced apart from each other in their orbital plane by approximately 19 minutes. It can be seen that there is no inter-satellite direct communication link between the five satellites, because the number and altitude of the satellites does not allow inter-satellite links to exist, so we can only operate and coordinate these satellites offline in the ground station. The invention provides more communication opportunities than before, provided that there are a limited number of communication relay nodes. The relay nodes can be located on the ground, such as ground communication stations or mobile communication vehicles, and can also be communication satellites deployed in space, and the like.

In the problem of on-line scheduling of satellite constellations, there are two types of tasks, the conventional observation task and the emergency observation task. And the ground control center receives and arranges the observation requests of the users and uploads the generated observation plans through the satellite-ground link. In the present invention, these observation requests as collected in advance are referred to as regular observation tasks. In contrast, observation requests that arrive randomly from satellites within and outside the constellation are referred to as emergency observation tasks, and unforeseen emergency tasks require online scheduling without ground intervention. The value of the return for emergency observation tasks is generally higher than for conventional observation tasks, since such tasks have high value and require a quick response. For the more general case, emergency observation tasks often arrive randomly in batches.

From the perspective of the wider multi-earth observation satellite system coordination, firstly, the earth observation satellite can only image one target on the ground at a time. Secondly, the tasks are directed to different observation targets and are independent of each other, and each task can be completed by one satellite. Third, the satellite scheduling problem is an oversubscription problem where the number of mission requests is significantly greater than the number of earth observation satellites available, thus building a mission plan for each satellite. For utility dependencies between earth observation satellites and tasks, there are four categories: no Dependency (ND), intra-self dispatch plan dependency (ID), cross dependency (XD) and Complex Dependency (CD) between dispatch plans. In our case, however, there is an Internal Dependency (ID) on the scheduling plan itself, which means that whether a given task can be performed for a given satellite depends on the scheduling of other tasks in its plan.

For the sake of uniform and simple expression, the characters used in the present invention are uniformly defined:

subscript

i, i', i ″, low orbit leo (low Earth orbit) satellite number, i ═ 1,2₁

g, the number of the communication relay node, h 1,2₂

j, j' is the number of the emergency observation task, j is 1,2

k is the conventional observation task number, k is 1,2_i

q is communication time window number, q is 1,2_ig

o, o', o ″, task batch number, o 1,2

Amount of ginseng

H, whole scheduling interval

tl is the total duration of the whole scheduling interval H

n₁Total number of LEO satellites in the system

n₂Number of available communication relay nodes

u number of emergency tasks in a batch of tasks

l total number of emergency tasks in the whole dispatching interval H

v_iNumber of regular tasks uploaded on LEO satellite i

r_oTime for relay node to issue emergency tasks of the o th batch to LEO satellite

tr_ioTime of the o-th batch of emergency tasks to reach LEO satellite i

sp_rollAngular velocity of lateral oscillation of LEO satellite

max theta maximum yaw angle of LEO satellite

oes_iojAiming at LEO satellite i, the earliest observation starting time of the jth emergency task in the jth batch

olf_iojAiming at LEO satellite i, the latest observation end time of the jth emergency task in the jth batch

ols_iojAiming at LEO satellite i, the latest observation starting time of the jth emergency task in the jth batch

otw_iojObservation time window for jth emergency task in No. o batch of LEO satellite i

p_ojImaging duration of jth emergency task in ith batch

e_ojThe yield of the jth emergency task in the ith batch is given by a manager or an on-board decision

θ_iojAiming at the lateral swing angle of the jth emergency task in the No. o batch of LEO satellites i

b_iojActual start time of jth emergency task in the o-th batch for LEO satellite i

c_iojActual end time of jth emergency task in the ith batch for LEO satellite i

oes_ikEarliest start time of kth conventional task on LEO satellite i

olf_ikThe latest ending time of the kth conventional task on LEO satellite i

p_ikImaging duration of kth conventional task on LEO satellite i

e_ikThe profit of the kth conventional mission on LEO satellite i is given by the administrator

b_ikActual start time of kth conventional task on LEO satellite i

c_ikActual end time of kth conventional task on LEO satellite i

s_iojkOn LEO satellite i, the order-dependent transition time when the kth regular task is executed immediately after the jth emergency task in the o lot

s_ikojOn LEO satellite i, when the jth emergency task in the jth batch is next to the jth emergency taskOrder dependent transition time when k regular tasks are executed

s_iojo′j′On LEO satellite i, the order-dependent transition time when the jth emergency task from the o 'th batch is executed immediately after the jth emergency task from the o' th batch, where (o ≠ o ') | (j ≠ j') 1

ctw_igqQ communication time window between LEO satellite i and relay node g

m_igThe number of communication time windows between the LEO satellite i and the relay node g

ut_iojRepresentation form of jth emergency task in the ith batch aiming at LEO satellite i

w_iojWhen the jth emergency task in the ith lot can be dispatched for execution on LEO satellite i, it equals 1, otherwise it equals 0.

The set of communication time windows between the communication relay node and all LEO satellites in the system is defined as follows:

specifically, a set of communication time windows between the communication relay node g and the LEO satellite i is defined as follows:

wherein a communication time window ctw_igqIs defined as:

ctw_igq＝[ces_igq,clf_igq]

ces therein_igqIs the earliest communication start time, clf_igqIs the latest communication end time.

Time availability of batch task & time availability of emergency task

The No. o emergency tasks may be issued from the relay node to LEO satellite i if and only if there are one or more communication time windows between LEO satellite i and the relay node. Availability to batch tasks w_ioThe calculation is as follows:

if and only if the o-th batch of emergency tasks starts at the latest observation start time ols_iojBefore arriving at LEO satellite i, the jth emergency task in the ith lot may be dispatched for execution on LEO satellite i. Time availability w for emergency tasks_iojThe calculation is as follows:

wherein ols_ioj＝max{olf_ioj-p_oj-(2·maxθ)/sp_roll,oes_ioj}。

According to the practical application situation, the invention is set as follows:

1. the emergency observation tasks from different sources are collected at the communication relay node and are issued by the communication relay node;

2. the load on the satellite is the optical imaging load, and the influence of the ground shadow needs to be considered;

3, the communication delay time between the LEO satellite and the relay node is short and can be ignored;

4. on-board dead space and sustained operating time are sufficient throughout the scheduling interval.

When the o "th batch of emergency tasks reaches the satellite constellation, the online co-scheduling problem can be represented by a mixed integer linear programming model milp (mixed integer linear programming):

decision variables

c_ioj+(s_iojk+p_ik)y_iojk+olf_ioj(y_iojk-1)≤c_ik(4.2)

c_ik+(s_ikoj+p_oj)y_ikoj+olf_ik(y_ikoj-1)≤c_ioj(4.3)

c_io'j'+(s_io'j'oj+p_ioj)y_io'j'oj+olf_io'j'(y_io'j'oj-1)≤c_ioj(4.4)

(tr_io+p_oj)x_ioj+s_ikojy_ikoj+s_io'j'ojy_io'j'oj≤c_ioj(4.5)

p_ikz_ik+s_iojky_iojk≤c_ik(4.6)

(oes_ioj+p_oj)x_ioj≤c_ioj(4.7)

(oes_ik+p_ik)z_ik≤c_ik(4.8)

c_ioj≤olf_iojx_ioj(4.9)

c_ik≤olf_ikz_ik(4.10)

b_ioj+p_oj＝c_ioj(4.11)

b_ik+p_ik＝c_ik(4.12)

x_ioj＝{0,1},y_iojk＝{0,1},y_ikoj＝{0,1},y_io'j'oj＝{0,1},z_ik＝{0,1},w_ioj＝{0,1} (4.15)

In the centralized-distributed collaborative architecture, the collaborative decision function is only configured on the central node, while other nodes can perform distributed computation, and the corresponding method is a task collaborative allocation method based on a market mechanism, including an auction mechanism. The auction is conducted by the auctioneer organization, wherein each earth observation satellite calculates a bid value corresponding to the task according to its local information and makes a bid accordingly. Each earth observation satellite informs the auctioneer of its bid and the auctioneer then decides the winner of each task. The algorithmic mechanism may ensure that a conflict-free solution is generated because the auctioneer selects only one earth observation satellite as the winner. Since the algorithmic mechanism is oriented to a centralized-distributed architecture, bid calculations are performed in a distributed fashion.

The invention is oriented to a distributed architecture, adopts a distributed algorithm, particularly an auction algorithm and a consistency protocol, performs conflict-free distribution on tasks, and is suitable for the unreliable communication environment which is difficult to realize global consistency situation perception. Aiming at the complex combination optimization problem of multi-satellite online cooperative task scheduling under communication constraint and oriented to a distributed architecture, the invention provides a consistency bundle algorithm m-ACBBA algorithm based on asynchronous communication.

The algorithm for synchronous communication is adopted to have strict rule definition on when communication is carried out, meanwhile, the synchronous strategy can queue the communication situation and can be executed only under the triggering of a specific event, and the algorithm is ensured to have an expected state in the program execution process. In most iterative algorithms, a synchronization algorithm is employed. In the synchronous iterative algorithm, each module executes parallel computation, shares state variables, and then waits for the next trigger event to perform the next iterative process of the algorithm. In this process, the state of each earth observation satellite is guaranteed.

The cost of using the synchronization algorithm is that synchronization behavior needs to be maintained, and particularly in distributed and decentralized algorithms, if synchronization cooperative behavior needs to be realized, simultaneous communication of cooperative parties needs to be visible, and cooperative synchronization can be performed.

The CBBA is a distributed auction algorithm, complex constraints are processed in a real-time distributed mode, a task allocation scheme is provided for multi-task allocation problems of multi-pair earth observation satellites, and the CBBA is very efficient in practical application.

The consistency bundle algorithm has a plurality of characteristics and can be used for realizing the cooperative task scheduling of the heterogeneous system, and N is assumed_tFor the total number of tasks to be allocated, L_tFor the maximum number of tasks per bundle, N_aD is the number of the earth observation satellites in the earth observation satellite network, and the specific details are as follows:

(1) the coherent bundle algorithm is distributed architecture oriented;

(2) the coherent bundle algorithm belongs to a polynomial time algorithm, and the computational complexity of the bundle construction stage is O (N)_tL_t)；

(3) The coherent bundle algorithm will be at max N_t,L_tN_aD iterations are internally converged, so that the consistent beam algorithm can well adapt to the changes of the network scale and the task number;

(4) different solving targets, earth observation satellite internal models and related constraints can be embodied by designing appropriate scoring functions. If the scoring function meets the marginal profit attenuation characteristic, a good feasible solution can be guaranteed.

For a distributed multi-satellite system, to execute a coherent beam algorithm, each LEO satellite needs to have six information vectors, which is as follows:

1. the task is to be bundled,

1≤n≤|BU_iol. The task bundle indicates that the LEO satellite i selects and schedules a successful task set from the o-th emergency task, and meanwhile, the tasks are sequenced according to the time of adding each task into the bundle. Length of current task bundle is | BU_ioL, and less than the number u of emergency tasks in a batch, | BU_ioU is less than or equal to | l; when task bundle is empty, use BU_ioPhi and BU_ioAnd | ═ 0.

2. The corresponding planning sequence is set to be in accordance with the plan,

1≤n≤|PA_iol. The tasks in the planned sequence are the same as the task bundle and are used to indicate the specific order in which LEO satellite i performs each task in the task bundle. The length of the planned sequence is the same as the length of the task bundle, | BU_io|＝|PA_io|≤u。

3. The execution of the time vector is performed,

1≤n≤|TI_iol. The execution time vector represents the actual start time of the LEO satellite i executing each task in the planning sequence, and the length of the vector is the same as the length of the planning sequence.

4. Winner list

Length u, wherein wa_iojAnd (4) representing the winner of the J-th task in the O-th emergency task which is currently considered by the LEO satellite i, wherein the specific value corresponds to the number of the winner. When wa_iojLEO satellite i considers that it is currently no winner for the task.

5. Bid and bid price list

A length u, wherein wb_iojAnd the bids given by the corresponding winners are represented, and when the value is 0, the task is represented as the current winners.

6. Time of flightTimestamp vector

Length n₁Wherein ts is_ioi′A timestamp indicating the latest information update by LEO satellite i for the second batch of emergency tasks, i.e. the point in time at which the updated information from LEO satellite i' was received.

The consistent beam algorithm CBBA consists of two stages of iteration: a bundle construction phase and a consistency construction phase, wherein the former generates ordered task bundles in a greedy search mode corresponding to each earth observation satellite, and the latter corresponds to identifying task allocation conflicts and carrying out conflict resolution through local communication between the adjacent earth observation satellites. These two phases are repeated iteratively until convergence is reached.

On the basis of a consistency beam algorithm CBBA, a new stage is added before the original two stages by improving the consistency beam algorithm m-CBBA, and a communication loop prediction stage is synchronized.

Because of the strict communication constraint in practical application, strong connectivity between earth observation satellites is impossible to achieve, so the communication loop prediction can balance between improving the global performance of the system and ensuring conflict-free scheduling of emergency tasks, rather than realizing global convergence on a winner list.

Stage 1: synchronous communication loop prediction phase

A synchronous communication loop is a two-way communication link for two or more earth observation satellites (satellites) to share information vectors to and receive feedback information from other earth observation satellites from the loop. A synchronous communication loop is constructed based on the existence of overlapping times between communication time windows of an initiator and one or more responders.

The description form is a multiple of ID, I, R, ES, LF >_SCL：

-the ID is an identifier;

i is the communication initiator number, i.e. the first one shares its information;

-R is the number of the communication responder receiving and sharing the information;

ES is the earliest start time of the communication loop;

LF is the latest end time of the communication loop.

Where communication initiator I and responder R are both LEO satellites and ES and LF are determined by overlapping time intervals over the communication time windows of the initiator and all responders.

Each synchronous sharing feedback interaction is formed by triggering on an available synchronous communication loop, wherein the sharing uplink timestamp is the same as the sharing downlink timestamp, and the feedback uplink timestamp is the same as the feedback downlink timestamp. Corresponding description form < id, i, i', t_US-DS,t_UF-DFOriginating from a synchronous communication loop < ID, I, R, ES, LF >_SCLWherein I ∈ I, I' ∈ R, t_US-DS,t_UF-DF∈[ES,LF]，t_US-DS＜t_UF-DF。

For each LEO satellite, when a batch of emergency observation tasks arrives, it is necessary to predict the available synchronous communication loops that will act as initiators themselves. Furthermore, when a set of shared information vectors arrives, it is necessary to record the synchronous communication loop that itself is the responder. Through both of the above scenarios, each satellite will establish and update a synchronous communication loop from its own perspective. For each satellite, all synchronous communication loops are updated and ordered and executed in order of earliest start time.

To achieve local convergence, whenever a task bundle constructed by a loop initiator or responder changes, a synchronous shared feedback interaction is triggered on the loop while generating a timestamp of the last information update, within the time interval in which the loop is available.

One shared feedback interaction in the synchronous communication loop is considered as one communication, and at most un exists in the online cooperative scheduling of the m-CBBA algorithm₁(n₁-1) a communication. In each shared feedback interaction, the following two phases are performed.

And (2) stage: bundle construction phase

In contrast to enumerating all possible task bundles, in an m-CBBA each LEO satellite constructs a respective task bundle and updates as the scheduling process progresses. In this phase of the algorithm, each LEO satellite continues to add tasks to its task bundle in a sequentially greedy manner until no more tasks can be added. Tasks in the task bundle are arranged according to the sequence of sequential addition, and tasks in the execution plan are ordered according to their corresponding actual start times.

The bundle construction process is based on a single-star oriented online scheduling algorithm. For each available task that is not currently in the task bundle, the LEO satellite compares its profit value to the task score in the current bid-winning vector and, if greater, retains the new task bid-winning score. For the unscheduled task set, the earth observation satellite selects the task with the highest score and adds it to the task bundle, and updates the task bundle, the execution plan, the timestamp, the winner and the landmark vector to include the newly added task.

The recursive process of bundle construction continues until the task bundle has reached its capacity limit, or no more tasks can be added to the task bundle, i.e., the satellite can no longer perform the remaining tasks over the other satellites.

And (3) stage: consistency build phase

Once an earth observation satellite has built its own mission beam, it needs to communicate with other earth observation satellites to resolve allocation conflicts. After receiving winners and corresponding winning bid information delivered by adjacent geo-observation satellites, each geo-observation satellite can determine whether any task in its task bundle has been won by other geo-observation satellites and winning the winning bid.

In the consistency construction phase, each pair of adjacent geostationary satellites synchronously share the following information vectors: winner list WA_ioBid-winning bid list WB_ioAnd a timestamp vector TS_ioAnd the time stamp indicating the latest information update received by other earth observation satellites is corresponded.

For each message passing between sender i and responder i', ground observations are madeThe satellite i' performs a series of operations based on the received information, thereby updating its own information vector. These specific operations include WA of their own information_i′o，WB_i′oAnd TS_i′oAnd compared to the information corresponding to the earth observation satellite i to determine which is the most up-to-date information for each task. The earth observation satellite i' may take three possible actions for each task j:

1. update of wa_i′oj＝wa_ioj,wb_i′oj＝wb_ioj；

2. Reset wa_i′oj＝φ,wb_i′oj＝0；

3. Abandon wa_i′oj＝wa_i′oj,wb_i′oj＝wb_i′oj；.

In response to the message sent from the earth observation satellite i, the operational decision rule employed by the earth observation satellite i' for the emergency mission oj is as shown in table 1.

TABLE 1 operational decision rules when receiving messages under synchronous communication

If during the communication a winner list WA is available_ioOr bid-winning bid list WB_ioIf there is a change, the earth observation satellite checks whether the updated or reset task is in its own task bundle. If so, these tasks and their successors in the task bundle need to be cleared for release, then when so

If the task position sequence number is the first task position sequence number won in the task bundle, all subsequent tasks n and task footers thereof in the task bundle are updated as follows:

the task bundle is thus cut to remove the subsequent tasks:

at the same time, the corresponding task entry is also removed from the execution plan and timestamp vector.

If the subsequent scheduled tasks are not released, the result is too conservative, which leads to the reduction of the algorithm income, and the subsequent scheduled tasks are released and the bundle construction is carried out again, which is determined by the time relevance before and after the task scheduling. At this point, the algorithm re-enters the second phase, adding a new task to the task bundle. The m-CBBA algorithm iterates in the last two stages until the information variables are no longer queued. In practical applications, the number of synchronous sharing feedback on the same synchronous communication loop is limited by the cost of communication cost.

The computational complexity of the synchronous communication loop prediction is

Given a specific LEO satellite, the computational complexity of the online scheduling algorithm for a group of emergency tasks is

The overall computational complexity of the m-CBBA algorithm is

Asynchronous communication is applied to the situation where the modules in the algorithm operate independently of each other. Therefore, asynchronous communication is widely used in decentralized algorithms, i.e. it is possible to utilize the available information at any time, and not according to strict scheduling of nodes.

In the m-CBBA algorithm, the beam construction phase can be performed independently and asynchronously, since only local information is required for the earth observation satellites at this phase. However, the adoption of the synchronous communication strategy in the consistency construction stage of the m-CBBA algorithm influences the response capability and performance of the whole system, because the conflict resolution strategy requires that each earth observation satellite know the latest information of each adjacent earth observation satellite in each communication iteration. It can be seen that this is a method of global consistency, in which each earth observation satellite shares its current state, waits to receive feedback messages from all neighboring earth observation satellites (or waits for a certain time), and then enters the next algorithm stage.

For a real-time system, the forced algorithm delay is not practical and affects the performance and convergence rate of the algorithm, so the invention provides an m-ACBBA algorithm and adopts an asynchronous communication loop and an asynchronous conflict resolution rule.

Compared with the m-CBBA algorithm, the m-ACBBA not only treats the relay node as a communication node, but also adopts the relay node to play the role of a coordinator. Thus, the difference between m-CBBA and m-ACBBA is that m-ACBBA uses asynchronous communication loop prediction and asynchronous local decision rules.

Stage 1: asynchronous communication loop prediction phase

When the LEO satellite schedules a new batch of emergency observation tasks, the information vectors of the LEO satellite are immediately shared to the relay nodes, and the relay nodes serve as coordinators and are responsible for predicting asynchronous communication loops.

Asynchronous sub-communication loops (ASCLs) are determined by the scheduling period of the single satellite itself, the deadline of the emergency task and the communication time window between the relay node and the LEO satellite. The specific description form is a multiple of ID, I, R, ES, LF >_ASCLThe description is the same as that of the synchronous communication loop, but the difference is that I or R is the relay node, and when an LEO satellite is determined to be I, R is set as the relay node. Otherwise, when the I is the relay node, the R is set as the LEO satellite. As can be seen, communication time window ctw_igqEquivalent to asynchronousSub communication Loop < id, i, g, ces_igq,clf_igq> or < id, g, i, ces_igq,clf_igq＞。

Asynchronous communication loops, also known as ACLs, are shorthand for Asyncronous communication loop, English, denoted as unary < ID, I, R, ES_US,LF_US,ES_DS-UF,LF_DS-UF,ES_DF,LF_DF＞_ACLAnd is composed of two or three independent asynchronous sub-communication loops.

FIG. 5a shows two asynchronous sub-communication loops < ID₁,I₁,R₁,ES₁,LF₁＞_ASCLAnd < ID₂,I₂,R₂,ES₂,LF₂＞_ASCLIn these two asynchronous sub-communication loops, there are five correlations, specifically as follows:

(1) both I and R are LEO satellites. ACL initiator I is the initiator I of the previous ASCL₁While ACL responder R is responder R of the next ASCL₂。

I＝I₁

R＝R₂

(2) Responder R of the previous ASCL₁And initiator I of the latter ASCL₂Are all communication relay nodes. When the communication relay nodes are connected with each other, the relay nodes corresponding to the two ASCLs may be different. Otherwise, the corresponding relay nodes are the same.

(3)ES_USAnd LF_USRepresenting a shared upstream communication time window of the ACL.

ES_US＝ES₁

LF_US＝min{LF₁,LF₂}

ES_US≤LF_US

(4)ES_DS-UFAnd LF_DS-UFA shared downlink-feedback uplink communication time window representing the ACL.

ES_DS-UF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DS-UF＝LF₂

ES_DS-UF≤LF_DS-UF

(5)ES_DFAnd LF_DFA feedback downlink communication time window representing the ACL.

ES_DF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DF＝LF₁

ES_DF≤LF_DF

The asynchronous communication loop ACL illustrated in fig. 5b consists of three asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL, in particular comprising < ID₁,I₁,R₁,ES₁,LF₁＞_ASCL，＜ID₂,I₂,R₂,ES₂,LF₂＞_ASCLAnd < ID₃,I₃,R₃,ES₃,LF₃＞_ASCLThe three asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL form an asynchronous communication loop ACL in the order of the earliest start time. Similarly, the following correlations exist among the three ASCLs, as follows:

(1) both I and R are LEO satellites. The initiator I of the ACL is the initiator I of the first ASCL₁While the responder R is the responder R of the last ASCL₃。

I＝I₁

R＝R₃

(2) Initiator I of the first ASCL₁Responder R with the last ASCL₃And the same to form a complete communication loop.

I₁＝R₃

(3) Responder R of first ASCL₁And initiator I of the last two ASCL₂And I₃Are all communication relay nodes. When the relay nodes are communicated with each other, the corresponding relay nodes can be different, otherwise, the relay nodes are the same relay node.

(4)ES_USAnd LF_USRepresenting a shared upstream communication time window of the ACL.

ES_US＝ES₁

LF_US＝min{LF₁,LF₂}

ES_US≤LF_US

(5)ES_DS-UFAnd LF_DS-UFA shared downlink-feedback uplink communication time window representing the ACL.

ES_DS-UF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DS-UF＝LF₂

ES_DS-UF≤LF_DS-UF

(6)ES_DFAnd LF_DFA feedback downlink communication time window representing the ACL.

ES_DF＝max{ES₂,ES₃}

LF_DF＝LF₃

ES_DF≤LF_DF

The asynchronous shared feedback interaction is triggered to be generated on an available asynchronous communication loop. In the asynchronous sharing feedback interaction, there are four timestamps including sharing uplink, sharing downlink, feedback uplink and feedback downlink. Its descriptive form < id, i, i', t_US,t_DS,t_UF,t_DFFrom asynchronous communication Loop < ID, I, R, ES_US,LF_US,ES_DS-UF,LF_DS-UF,ES_DF,LF_DF＞_ACLWherein I ∈ I, I' ∈ R, t_US∈[ES_US,LF_US]， t_DS,t_UF∈[ES_DS-UF,LF_DS-UF]，t_DF∈[ES_DF,LF_DF]，t_US≤t_DS，t_DS＜t_UF，t_UF≤t_DF。

For each LEO satellite, during the ACL's available time interval, when either the initiator or the responder's discretionWhen the transaction bundle changes, asynchronous shared feedback interaction is executed on the loop. Because the time occupied by communication delay and scheduling calculation is relatively short, the time stamps of the shared downlink and the feedback uplink are equal, t_DS≈t_UF。

The one asynchronous sharing feedback interaction on the ACL includes three communications in total, namely sharing uplink, sharing downlink-feedback uplink and feedback downlink. For one batch of emergency tasks, performing online cooperative scheduling by adopting an m-ACBBA algorithm, wherein 3un is needed at most₁(n₁-1) a communication.

In each asynchronous shared feedback interaction, both bundle construction and consistency construction are performed. Compared with the m-CBBA algorithm, the difference lies in that the m-ACBBA algorithm adopts an asynchronous local decision rule in the consistency construction stage.

Messages arrive out of order in an asynchronous communication protocol, e.g., messages generated at an earlier time may arrive later than messages generated at a later time. Therefore, the timestamp update mechanism based on the message reception time for the earth observation satellite in the m-CBBA algorithm is not suitable for the asynchronous case. Then the m-ACBBA algorithm is configured, the time stamp on the message is used to indicate the actual time winning the earth observation satellite, i.e. the actual time winning the earth observation satellite

A length u, wherein ts_iojIndicating the time of generation of this winning bid on LEO satellite i for emergency task j in lot o. Rather than the earth-observation satellite message update time employed in the m-CBBA algorithm, i.e.

Length n₁Wherein ts is_ioi′A timestamp indicating the latest information update by LEO satellite i for the second batch of emergency tasks.

In the m-ACBBA algorithm, a series of local resolution rules are employed without requiring global state information. Meanwhile, the resolution protocol can carry out the consistency processing on the disordered messages and the redundant information.

The conflict resolution rules in the m-ACBBA algorithm are not just the recipient (responder) updates the winner list and bid price list, but determines the messages that need to be shared again.

The reason for sharing again is that: firstly, the communication burden in the network is reduced, and the redundant information is prevented from being shared again; the second is to deal with the confusion of time stamps in asynchronous systems.

The recipient may take the following five possible actions:

1. update & re-share: the receiver updates the winner list, the bid-winning list and the winning time vector according to the information from the sender, and then shares the update;

2. discard & re-share: the receiver does not change the information state of the receiver, and then shares the winner information determined by the receiver;

3. discard & no more share: the receiver does not change the information state of the receiver and does not share the information, and the method is applied to the condition that the received information is consistent with the existing information.

4. Reset & re-share: the receiver clears the winner and the winner value, and then shares the originally received message again, so as to eliminate confusion;

5. update time & re-share: the recipient is the winner and when the message is received, the winning generation timestamp is updated to the current time to confirm that the recipient still believes to be the winner.

In response to the message sent from the earth observation satellite i, the operational decision rule employed by the earth observation satellite i' for the emergency mission oj is as shown in table 3.

TABLE 3 local decision rules when receiving messages in asynchronous communication

The computational complexity of the prediction of the asynchronous communication loop is

For a given LEO satellite, the computational complexity of online scheduling for a batch of emergency tasks is

The overall computational complexity of the m-ACBBA algorithm is then

The objective of the earth observation task is, for example, to monitor findings, detail and track forest fires or volcanic eruption activity. More specifically, forest fires and volcanic eruptions require automatic monitoring for discovery, localization and identification. In the case of emergency events, the system is focused on improving the quick response capability of the system and improving the overall benefit of the system through online cooperation.

The geostationary orbit (GEO) communication satellite is used as a communication relay node, the situation of communication shortage is relieved to a certain extent, but the communication condition is still limited, and the constraint is still harsh. First, the communication time window between the GEO and the LEO is much larger than the communication time window between the ground station and the LEO satellite; secondly, the GEO is connected with ground stations in the coverage range of the GEO all the time, so that the real-time availability of task requirement uploading and data downloading is ensured, and therefore, multi-satellite online collaboration becomes a reality in the communication mode, and disaster management on a higher level can be supported. Fig. 6 shows the communication available between the space segment and the ground segment.

Among them can be seen:

(1) communications between the LEO satellite and the GEO satellite are available as the LEO passes through the coverage area of the GEO. The communication link is used for realizing bidirectional transmission of emergency observation tasks between the LEO and the ground station through the GEO, and downloading low-speed data from the LEO to the Ground Station (GS).

(2) The communication interaction between the GEO and the GS is possible from time to time because the GS is located in the coverage area of the GEO. The communication link is used for emergency observation task uploading and low-rate data downloading.

(3) Two-way communication interaction between the GEO is possible, enabling the transfer of task-related information between GEO.

(4) There is no direct communication between LEO satellites.

In an application scene, 3 LEO satellites are configured on the same orbit, 3 GEO satellites are configured above the equator, and specific satellite parameters are shown in table 4. The time length of the simulation was set to 6 h.

TABLE 4 orbital parameter settings for three LEO satellites and three GEO satellites

The configuration scenario is characterized as follows:

1. when three LEO satellites in the same orbit are imaging the same target in view on the ground, the time interval between LEO _ a and LEO _ B is about 12 minutes, and the time interval between LEO _ B and LEO _ C is also 12 minutes.

The communication coverage area of a GEO satellite is a conical area with a cone angle of 7.5 °.

And 3, an observation imaging area of the LEO satellite is a rectangle. If the same target is observed and imaged on the same rail, the change value of the imaging angle between LEO _ a and LEO _ B is about 20 °, and the change value of the imaging angle between LEO _ B and LEO _ C is also about 20 °.

The communication conditions of the current distributed satellite system are analyzed, including the communication conditions between high and low orbit satellites facing a centralized-distributed architecture, as shown in table 5, and the communication conditions between low orbits facing a decentralized architecture, as shown in table 6.

TABLE 5 communication constraints between high and low orbit satellites in current distributed satellite systems

TABLE 6 communication constraints between LEO satellites in current distributed satellite systems

Compared with four online cooperative scheduling algorithms oriented to the distributed satellite system, the method comprises a contract network agreement algorithm SI-CNP under a single task, a contract network agreement algorithm BA-CNP under a batch task, an improved consistency bundle algorithm m-CBBA and an improved asynchronous consistency bundle algorithm m-ACBBA.

In the m-CBBA and m-ACBBA algorithms, sharing uplink and sharing downlink of each sharing feedback interaction are respectively generated randomly in a time interval between the earliest starting time and the latest ending time corresponding to a communication loop. On each full communication loop, at most one shared feedback interaction is performed.

Three performance indexes are adopted, namely total income, the proportion of the scheduled successful emergency tasks and the corresponding total communication times. The three indexes are specifically described as follows:

(1) the total system gain refers to the sum of all scheduled successful task gains of the distributed satellite system in the whole scheduling interval.

(2) The proportion of the successfully scheduled emergency observation tasks refers to the percentage of the successfully scheduled emergency observation tasks in the distributed satellite system in the emergency observation tasks entering the scheduling solution.

(3) The total number of communications. The total number of communication is the sum of the number of communication times of three unidirectional communication situations, namely LEO initiates communication to GEO, GEO initiates communication to LEO and unidirectional communication between GEOs.

In order to evaluate the performance of four online cooperative scheduling algorithms, we focus on the responsiveness of a distributed satellite system to the arrival of an emergency observation task, so that two parameters related to the task, the arrival rate and the camera pointing angle of the emergency observation task, one parameter related to a scheduling mechanism, and a rolling scheduling period are very important for the generation of a test example. It can be seen that the two task-related parameter quantities represent the time distribution characteristic and the space distribution characteristic of the emergency observation task, respectively, and the rolling scheduling period determines the scale of the online scheduling calculation. Furthermore, all other parameter quantities are generated by a given uniform distribution. The parameter settings associated with the satellite, the task and the scheduling mechanism are shown in table 7.

TABLE 7 relevant parameter settings

Fig. 7a to 7c show the results of the m-CBBA algorithm for the case of no interconnection and interconnection between GEO satellites respectively in different rolling scheduling periods. Interconnected GEO satellite networks facilitate higher overall yields and perform a higher proportion of emergency tasks than if there were no interconnections between GEO satellites. Because interworking causes an increase in the number of communication time windows or an extension of the time intervals compared to non-interworking. Meanwhile, interconnection and interworking require more communication, especially communication interaction between GEO.

Table 8 shows that as the emergency task arrival rate increases, the total revenue achieved by each algorithm also increases. Under the condition that the arrival rates of the emergency tasks are the same, the wider the spatial distribution range of the emergency tasks is, the lower the total income is obtained, and the lower the proportion of the emergency tasks which are successfully scheduled is.

When the rolling scheduling period T is 6min, the m-ACBBA and the m-CBBA both obtain higher total income than the SI-CNP and the BA-CNP when the spatial and temporal distribution of the emergency tasks are the same, and the total income of the m-ACBBA is generally higher than that of the m-CBBA. And when the rolling scheduling period T is 12min, the m-ACBBA obtains the highest total benefit in the four algorithms, and the benefit obtained by the SI-CNP algorithm is higher than that obtained by the BA-CNP and m-CBBA algorithms. It can be seen that, for the BA-CNP and m-CBBA algorithms, the longer the rolling scheduling period is, the lower the total profit is, because the BA-CNP algorithm schedules the batch tasks, and each scheduling period corresponds to one emergency task batch, and at the same time, the m-CBBA algorithm performs sharing feedback interaction at most once on the synchronous communication loop in each rolling scheduling period, the longer the rolling scheduling period is, the fewer the sharing feedback times are, thereby affecting the timely response scheduling of the emergency tasks.

For the SI-CNP and m-ACBBA algorithms, the longer the rolling scheduling period is, the higher the total profit is, especially in the case that the number of communication times of the m-CBBA algorithm is reduced, the total profit is still increased, and the asynchronous communication strategy is excellent.

TABLE 8 Total revenue obtained by the algorithms under different parameters

Table 9 shows that the m-ACBBA has the highest proportion of emergency tasks successfully scheduled in the four algorithms under the same parameter quantity. Sequencing the algorithms according to the mode that the proportion of the successfully scheduled emergency tasks is from high to low as a whole, and sequentially: m-ACBBA > m-CBBA > BA-CNP > SI-CNP.

TABLE 9 Emergency mission scheduling success ratio (%) -obtained by each algorithm under different parameter conditions

Table 10 shows that as the arrival rate of emergency tasks increases, the number of communications increases, while the traffic growth of SI-CNP is greatest because it co-schedules individual tasks in turn. In the four algorithms, the communication times of the m-CBBA are the minimum, and the communication times of the SI-CNP are the maximum, because the construction conditions of the synchronous communication loop are strict, the number of the loops is small, and the communication interaction times are further influenced. As the rolling scheduling period grows, the traffic corresponding to the SI-CNP is greatly increased, and the traffic corresponding to the other three algorithms is reduced.

TABLE 10 number of communications for each algorithm under different parameters

Table 11 shows that all three algorithms have improved overall yield over SI-CNP, with the greatest magnitude of gain increase for m-ACBBA. Similarly, Table 12 shows that the three algorithms have improved emergency task scheduling success rates compared to the SI-CNP algorithm, with the m-ACBBA increasing the most.

Table 13 shows that as the arrival rate of emergency tasks increases, the average calculation time increases. Under the same parameter condition, the calculation time required by the four algorithms is almost the same and is matched with the actual calculation capacity on the satellite.

TABLE 11 increase in yield (%), for each algorithm, when T is 6min, compared to SI-CNP

TABLE 12 Emergency task scheduling success increment (%) -for each algorithm compared to SI-CNP when T is 6min

TABLE 13 average calculated time (/ s) for scheduling in a scheduling period for a LEO satellite

In summary, when the communication cost in the system is high, the m-CBBA algorithm can balance the total system benefit and the number of times of communication, and when the communication cost of the system is low, the m-ACBBA algorithm is the best choice for obtaining the high total system benefit and the high emergency task scheduling success ratio.

The invention researches the problem of on-line cooperative scheduling of an isomorphic distributed earth observation satellite system to a simple task under strict communication constraint. The multi-satellite cooperative scheduling problem oriented to simple tasks belongs to the ID [ ST-SR-TA ] problem. Because a plurality of tasks can be allocated and scheduled on a single satellite, and due to time window constraints and resource (electricity, solid) limitations, single-satellite scheduling for a certain task is affected by other tasks, and there is a dependency relationship inside the scheduling plan. Firstly, defining batch availability and time effectiveness of emergency tasks aiming at a communication time window and an observation time window, and constructing a subproblem MILP model when each batch of emergency tasks arrives; then, based on a single-satellite online scheduling mechanism, two online cooperative task scheduling algorithms are respectively provided for a centralized-distributed architecture and a distributed architecture. Specifically, the two algorithms facing the centralized-distributed architecture are a contract network agreement algorithm SI-CNP under a single task and a contract network agreement algorithm BA-CNP under a batch task; two algorithms facing decentralized architecture are the improved coherence bundle algorithm m-CBBA and the improved asynchronous coherence bundle algorithm m-ACBBA, which are based on synchronous and asynchronous communication, respectively. The calculation experiment result shows that compared with the situation that the communication is not interconnected, the interconnection and the intercommunication of the relay nodes can increase and expand the communication time window, and the increase of the proportion of the total system income and the emergency task scheduling success is facilitated. When the communication cost in the system is high, the m-CBBA algorithm dominates in balancing profit and the number of communications required. When the communication cost in the system is high, the m-CBBA algorithm can balance the total income of the system and the communication times, and when the communication cost of the system is low, the m-ACBBA algorithm is the best choice for obtaining the ratio of the total income of the system to the success rate of the scheduling of the emergency tasks.

Finally, it should be pointed out that: the above examples are only for illustrating the technical solutions of the present invention, and are not limited thereto. Those of ordinary skill in the art will understand that: modifications can be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or some technical features may be equivalently replaced; such modifications or substitutions do not depart from the spirit and scope of the corresponding technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims (7)

1. A multi-satellite online collaboration method based on asynchronous communication is characterized in that a distributed architecture is adopted by the multi-satellite, each earth observation satellite LEO is an autonomous satellite, the same intelligent level is provided in the architecture, no level difference exists, the autonomous satellites utilize geostationary orbit communication satellites as relay nodes for communication, the geostationary orbit communication satellites play a role of a coordinator and are responsible for predicting asynchronous communication loops, and for emergency observation tasks, each autonomous satellite is subjected to a cyclic process of 'autonomous planning and scheduling-communication interaction-cooperative decision', wherein each autonomous satellite not only updates a task plan of the autonomous satellite but also maintains task plans of other autonomous satellites in the architecture, and the multi-satellite online collaboration method based on asynchronous communication adopts an asynchronous consistency bundle algorithm based on asynchronous communication,

the asynchronous coherence bundle algorithm based on asynchronous communication comprises the following steps: an asynchronous communication loop prediction phase, a bundle construction phase and a consistency construction phase,

in the asynchronous communication loop prediction stage, after a new batch of emergency observation tasks are dispatched by the geostationary observation satellite, the information vector of the new batch of emergency observation tasks is immediately shared to the geostationary orbit communication satellite, and the geostationary orbit communication satellite predicts an asynchronous communication loop ACL,

in the bundle construction phase, each earth observation satellite continuously adds tasks to its task bundle in a sequential greedy manner until no more tasks can be added,

in the consistency construction phase, task allocation conflicts are identified and conflict resolution is performed through local communication between the identified task allocation conflicts and adjacent geostationary satellites.

2. The asynchronous communication based multi-satellite online collaboration method as claimed in claim 1,

for each earth observation satellite, during the available time interval of the ACL, when the task beam of the initiator or responder is changed, then the ACL is inPerforming asynchronous sharing feedback interaction on ACL, and equating the time stamp of sharing downlink and feedback uplink, t_DS≈t_UFIn each asynchronous sharing feedback interaction, a bundle construction phase and a consistency construction phase are carried out, wherein the asynchronous sharing feedback interaction is triggered and generated on an available asynchronous communication loop, in the asynchronous sharing feedback interaction, four timestamps are provided in total, the four timestamps comprise a sharing uplink, a sharing downlink, a feedback uplink and a feedback downlink,

the asynchronous communication loop ACL is composed of two or three independent asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL, and the description form of ASCL is a multiple element group < ID, I, R, ES, LF >)_ASCL，

-the ID is an identifier;

i is the communication initiator number, i.e. the first one shares its information;

-R is the number of the communication responder receiving and sharing the information;

ES is the earliest start time of the asynchronous sub-communication loop;

LF is the latest end time of the asynchronous sub-communication loop,

i or R is a relay node, when an LEO is determined to be I, R is set as the relay node, otherwise, when I is the relay node, R is set as the LEO,

the asynchronous communication loop ACL is formed by two independent asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL in the case where the asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL have overlapping time intervals, and is formed by three independent asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL in the case where the asynchronous sub-communication loops ASCL do not have overlapping time intervals.

3. The asynchronous communication based multi-satellite online collaboration method as claimed in claim 2,

the tasks in the task bundle are arranged according to the sequence of sequential addition, and the tasks in the task plan are ordered according to the corresponding actual starting time, in the beam construction stage, each earth observation satellite constructs a corresponding task beam and updates the task beam along with the progress of the scheduling process, for each available task not currently in the task bundle, the earth observation satellite compares its profit value with the task score in the current bid winning vector, if the profit value is greater, retains the new task bid score, for the unscheduled task set, selecting the task with the highest score from the earth observation satellites, and adds it to the task bundle, the recursive process of bundle construction continues until the task bundle has reached its capacity limit, or no more tasks can be added to the task bundle, i.e., the geostationary satellite is no longer able to perform the remaining tasks over other geostationary satellites.

4. The asynchronous communication based multi-satellite online collaboration method as claimed in claim 2 wherein < ID in two asynchronous sub communication loops₁,I₁,R₁,ES₁,LF₁＞_ASCLAnd < ID₂,I₂,R₂,ES₂,LF₂＞_ASCLIn the case where the asynchronous communication loop is formed, in the two asynchronous sub-communication loops, the following five correlation relationships exist:

(1) both I and R are LEO satellites, ACL initiator I is the initiator I of the previous ASCL₁While ACL responder R is responder R of the next ASCL₂；

I＝I₁

R＝R₂

(2) Responder R of the previous ASCL₁And initiator I of the latter ASCL₂Are all communication relay nodes;

when the communication relay nodes are connected with each other, the relay nodes corresponding to the two ASCLs may not be the same,

otherwise, the corresponding relay nodes are the same;

(3)ES_USand LF_USRepresenting a shared uplink communication time window of the ACL;

ES_US＝ES₁

LF_US＝min{LF₁,LF₂}

ES_US≤LF_US

(4)ES_DS-UFand LF_DS-UFRepresenting a shared downlink-feedback uplink communication time window of the ACL;

ES_DS-UF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DS-UF＝LF₂

ES_DS-UF≤LF_DS-UF

(5)ES_DFand LF_DFA feedback downlink communication time window representing an ACL;

ES_DF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DF＝LF₁

ES_DF≤LF_DF。

5. the asynchronous communication based multi-satellite online collaboration method as claimed in claim 2 wherein < ID in three asynchronous sub communication loops₁,I₁,R₁,ES₁,LF₁＞_ASCL，＜ID₂,I₂,R₂,ES₂,LF₂＞_ASCLAnd < ID₃,I₃,R₃,ES₃,LF₃＞_ASCLIn the case where the asynchronous communication loop is formed, the following correlation exists among the three asynchronous sub-communication loops:

(1) both I and R are LEO satellites, and the initiator I of the ACL is the initiator I of the first ASCL₁While the responder R is the responder R of the last ASCL₃，

I＝I₁

R＝R₃

(2) Initiator I of the first ASCL₁Responder R with the last ASCL₃And the same, to form a complete communication loop,

I₁＝R₃

(3) responder R of first ASCL₁And the last two ASInitiator I of CL₂And I₃All are communication relay nodes, when the relay nodes are communicated with each other, the corresponding relay nodes can be different, otherwise, the relay nodes are the same relay node,

(4)ES_USand LF_USRepresenting a shared upstream communication time window of the ACL,

ES_US＝ES₁

LF_US＝min{LF₁,LF₂}

ES_US≤LF_US

(5)ES_DS-UFand LF_DS-UFA shared downstream-feedback upstream communication time window representing an ACL,

ES_DS-UF＝max{ES₁,ES₂}

LF_DS-UF＝LF₂

ES_DS-UF≤LF_DS-UF

(6)ES_DFand LF_DFA feedback downlink communication time window representing the ACL,

ES_DF＝max{ES₂,ES₃}

LF_DF＝LF₃

ES_DF≤LF_DF。

6. a multi-satellite online collaboration method based on asynchronous communication as claimed in claim 4 or 5 wherein a responder takes one of the following five actions:

1) update & re-share: the responder updates the winner list, the winning bid list and the winning time vector according to the information sent by the sender, and then shares the update;

2) discard & re-share: the responder does not change the information state of the responder and then shares the winner information determined by the responder;

3) discard & no more share: the responder does not change the information state of the responder and does not share the information, and the responder is applied to the condition that the received information is consistent with the existing information;

4) reset & re-share: the responder clears the winner and the winner value and then shares the originally received message again, so that confusion is eliminated;

5) update time & re-share: the responder is the winner and, upon receiving the message, updates its winning generation timestamp to the current time to confirm that it still considers itself to be the winner.

7. The asynchronous communication based multi-satellite online collaboration method as claimed in claim 6 wherein, in responding to a message sent from an earth observation satellite as a sender, the operational decision rules adopted by the earth observation satellite as a responder for the contingency task oj are as follows,

local decision rule when receiving message under asynchronous communication

Wherein the content of the first and second substances,

i. i ', i ", i'" denote earth observation satellites;

wa_iojrepresenting the currently considered winner of the earth observation satellite i for the j task in the o emergency task;

wa_i′ojrepresenting the currently considered winner of the earth observation satellite i' for the j task in the o emergency task;

wb_iojindicating the current bid-winning and bid-bidding information considered by the earth observation satellite i for the j task in the o emergency task;

wb_i′ojindicating that the earth observation satellite i 'is currently considered to be in the emergency task of the o' th lotBid-winning and bidding information of the jth task;

ts_iojtime stamp information representing that the earth observation satellite i is currently considered to be updated with the latest information for the j task in the o emergency task;

ts_i′ojtime stamp information representing the current update of the latest information of the j task in the o emergency task for the earth observation satellite i';

phi denotes an empty set.

Images