CN114862168A - Multi-scheme intelligent switching system under deduction simulation environment - Google Patents
Multi-scheme intelligent switching system under deduction simulation environment Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN114862168A CN114862168A CN202210455401.0A CN202210455401A CN114862168A CN 114862168 A CN114862168 A CN 114862168A CN 202210455401 A CN202210455401 A CN 202210455401A CN 114862168 A CN114862168 A CN 114862168A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- scheme
- action
- deduction
- countermeasure
- list
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Granted
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0637—Strategic management or analysis, e.g. setting a goal or target of an organisation; Planning actions based on goals; Analysis or evaluation of effectiveness of goals
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention provides a multi-scheme intelligent switching system in a deduction simulation environment, which comprises a scheme definition module and a scheme management module; the scheme definition module is used for statically defining various action schemes based on the factory mode, and the static definition of each action scheme comprises the following steps: scheme name and force deployment; the scheme management module is used for instantiating a plurality of action schemes defined in the scheme definition module based on the factory mode; and the system is also used for data interaction with the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system in the confrontation process. The invention can make a plurality of alternative schemes in advance in the process of large-scale multi-loop countermeasure deduction so as to determine the scheme switching time to select the most appropriate scheme according to the acquired situation information and historical countermeasure data before the countermeasure formally starts, thereby greatly improving the winning probability.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the field of information management, in particular to a multi-scheme intelligent switching system in a deduction simulation environment.
Background
The combined intelligent battle deduction is of a back-to-back type. Before each deduction and fight begins, detailed information such as battlefield environment and military force composition of the two parties is disclosed. And simultaneously, the task targets of all the parties in the confrontation and the corresponding winning and losing point rules are also clarified. Besides, the action schemes, the military force deployment and the action plan of the red and blue parties are mutually transparent. After the deduction of the confrontation is started, the necessary reconnaissance means is usually required to be firstly applied to acquire the initial force deployment and force movement information of the opponent, so that the individual force intelligence can continuously implement corresponding combat actions according to the situation and subsequent changes and the confrontation rules and the preset combat action scheme until the victory or the deduction time is ended. The whole deduction process is a comparison of the intelligent agent strain capacity of the two parties of red and blue, and is a comparison of the quality of the fighting action scheme of the two parties.
The combined combat intelligent confrontation deduction can repeatedly polish and optimize a specific scheme under the same combat idea through multiple rounds of analog simulation, and is an effective means for a command operation unit, revealing a combat law, being familiar with equipment application and training command capability. The two confrontation parties need to study and judge possible tactical deployment and operation plans of the opponent in advance according to the understanding of the target task and the battlefield environment and the analysis of the strength of the enemy, so as to determine the tactical deployment of the opponent and make a corresponding action plan. In the process of the combined operation deduction simulation, if the operation deployment and the action plan of the opposite side can be accurately predicted, the operation deployment of the local side can be pertinently arranged, and the most favorable action scheme is made, so that a victory foundation is laid for the final deduction result at the beginning. However, due to the existence of war fog, the battlefield situation is complex and variable, and has high uncertainty, the real situation of the other party is often difficult to master in advance in the countermeasure deduction process, which brings great difficulty and challenge to the scheme making, and thus, higher capability requirements are provided for the commander.
A set of strict, fine and thoroughly detailed scheme often needs to consider a plurality of countermeasures under possible enemy conditions, so that the method is guaranteed to have higher winning probability. However, due to the uncertainty and complexity of combat countermeasures, it is often difficult to deal with a variety of different enemies with only one set of solution. Meanwhile, the complexity of the detailed scheme is high, and the temporary adjustment is carried out based on one set of scheme, so that the difficulty is very high, the comprehensive consideration is usually difficult under the condition of short-term storage, and a large failure risk is faced. Based on a single action scheme, it is difficult to guarantee that the victory ticket is stably played in unknown and variable battlefield environments, and the victory ticket is possibly pressed by the opponent. Therefore, it is necessary to provide a management system capable of providing management of multiple schemes.
Disclosure of Invention
In order to solve the problems existing in the prior art, the invention provides a multi-scheme intelligent switching system in a deduction simulation environment, which comprises:
the scheme definition module is used for statically defining various action schemes based on the factory mode, and the static definition of each action scheme comprises the following steps: scheme name and force deployment; the force deployment is embodied by equipment;
the scheme management module is used for instantiating a plurality of action schemes defined in the scheme definition module based on the factory mode; and the system is also used for data interaction with the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system in the confrontation process.
Preferably, the force deployment comprises: various equipment and initial coordinates of the equipment.
Preferably, the scheme definition module includes: a solution base class and a plurality of solution classes implemented for the solution base classes; each scheme class corresponds to one scheme;
the scheme base class is used for defining variable members of scheme basic information and interface members of behavior logic;
wherein the variable members include at least one or more of: scheme name, equipment model, number and deployment position; the interface members include at least equipment action plans.
Preferably, the data interaction includes: switching the instantiated action scheme based on the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system; and maintaining each instantiated action scheme according to the deduction condition of the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system.
Preferably, the scheme management module is implemented by a scheme management class: the project management class comprises a project factory class;
the schema factory class is used to define specific behavior logic through interfaces in each schema class to instantiate specific schema objects.
Preferably, the scheme management module includes:
the scheme creating submodule is used for calling the scheme factory class to instantiate each action scheme and storing the scheme in the scheme list;
the management data maintenance submodule is used for maintaining information of each action scheme in a deduction maintenance scheme list based on the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system;
and the scheme switching sub-module is used for selecting an action scheme of the next deduction from the scheme list based on the deduction of the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system.
Preferably, the action scheme of the field countermeasure comprises:
when the self wins after the deduction is finished, the current action scheme is kept as the action scheme of the next deduction, otherwise, whether the confrontation of the current self action scheme and the opposite action scheme reaches the minimum trial deduction field number min (R) test )；
If not, the minimum trial deduction field number min (R) is obtained test ) If so, the current action scheme is continuously used; if the minimum heuristic field number min (R) has been reached test ) Then switching to the next action scheme of the current action scheme in the scheme list as the action scheme of the next deduction.
Preferably, the minimum heuristic field number min (R) test ) The calculation formula (2) is as follows;
where E is the confidence of the derived result desired by the user and E is the confidence of the derived result of the system.
Preferably, the management data maintenance submodule is specifically configured to:
acquiring a predetermined own scheme list; the list of own-party solutions includes at least one own-party action solution;
and switching the action schemes from the own scheme list to carry out countermeasure by using a countermeasure simulation system based on the preset number of countermeasure fields, and maintaining the information of each action scheme in the own scheme list according to each countermeasure result.
Preferably, the information of each action plan includes: ranking of action plans, action plan i fight against deduction history total score
And historical field average score
Preferably, the action plan i confrontation deduction history total score
The calculation formula (2) is as follows;
in the formula, r i The derived number of fields for the current action scenario i;
is as follows; score of j' th fight deduction of own action plan i;
the action plan i historical field average score
Is calculated as follows:
compared with the prior art, the invention has the beneficial effects that:
the invention provides a multi-scheme intelligent switching system in a deduction simulation environment, which comprises a scheme definition module and a scheme management module; the scheme definition module is used for statically defining various action schemes based on the factory mode, and the static definition of each action scheme comprises the following steps: scheme name and force deployment; the scheme management module is used for instantiating a plurality of action schemes defined in the scheme definition module based on the plant mode; the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system is also used for carrying out data interaction with the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system in the confrontation process; the invention can formulate a plurality of alternative schemes in advance in the process of large-scale multi-cooperation system confrontation deduction so as to determine the scheme switching time to select the most appropriate scheme according to the acquired situation information and historical confrontation data before the confrontation formally starts, thereby greatly improving the winning probability;
the technical scheme provided by the invention introduces a factory mode, so that the software structure is simpler and more reasonable, and the development is more agile and efficient.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a multi-scheme intelligent switching system according to the present invention;
FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating the structure and relationship of the major classes of the present invention;
FIG. 3 is a timing diagram illustrating the interaction of messages between the main objects of the present invention;
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of an optimal behavior scheme for automatic switching of multiple behavior schemes;
FIG. 5 is a flow chart of action scenario prediction;
fig. 6 is a comparison of the results of the deductive tests for three cases.
Detailed Description
For a better understanding of the present invention, reference is made to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and examples.
Example 1
The invention provides a multi-scheme intelligent switching system in a deduction simulation environment, which comprises the following components as shown in figure 1: a scheme definition module and a scheme management module. The scheme definition module is used for statically defining various action schemes based on the factory mode, and the static definition of each action scheme comprises the following steps: scheme name and force deployment; the force deployment is embodied by equipment; the scheme management module is used for instantiating a plurality of action schemes defined in the scheme definition module based on the factory mode; and the system is also used for data interaction with the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system in the confrontation process.
The scheme definition refers to determining specific contents of each scheme, including initial equipment deployment positions, corresponding combat actions and the like; the scheme management module comprises: the system comprises a scheme creating submodule, a management data maintenance submodule and a scheme switching submodule.
The scheme creating submodule is used for calling the scheme factory class to instantiate each action scheme and storing the action scheme in the scheme list;
the management data maintenance submodule is used for maintaining information of each action scheme in a deduction maintenance scheme list based on the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system;
and the scheme switching sub-module is used for selecting an action scheme of the next deduction from the scheme list based on the deduction of the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system. The action scheme selected from the scheme list based on the deduction of the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system needs to prioritize all the schemes in the order of high scores to low scores according to the deduction result of each scheme.
For specific analysis, in terms of software design and implementation, the key point of the scheme definition is to generate each specific scheme object. Because each scheme object has the same structure and comprises two attributes of the initial deployment position of the equipment and the fighting action, and the specific attribute data or the action logic are different, the user only needs to determine the attribute data or the action logic. This is a more typical scene of a createobject. In the field of design modes of software engineering, a factory mode is the most common and classic creation mode, the creation steps of objects are hidden for users, newly created objects are pointed through a common software interface, and only necessary information in the objects is defined by the users according to actual conditions or requirements. Based on the method, the factory mode is introduced into the scheme definition module part of the software, so that the software structure is simpler and more reasonable, and the development is more agile and efficient.
Meanwhile, the software is divided into two levels according to management level and centralized management and independent management. The centralized management refers to the management of all the local schemes, and mainly comprises the maintenance of a priority ranking list of the updating schemes; the individual management is the individual management of each scheme, mainly the definition of the scheme and the updating of the attribute data. Specifically, the centralized management content includes information related to scheme management, data maintenance, and scheme scheduling rules in deduction. In engineering practice, this level is abstracted into a schema management class. The relevant information and data comprise the total scheme number preset by a user, the total field number, the system deduction result confidence degree, the expected reliability set by the user, the initial success rate of each combat scheme, the single field deduction expected score set by the user and the like, the relevant information and data are abstracted into variable members of the class, the scheme scheduling rules embody the scheduling behaviors, and the scheme scheduling rules are abstracted into function members of the class. And the independent management is that each scheme has a unique management class, the main content is the characteristic information unique to the scheme, including the initial equipment deployment data under the scheme, the deduction field average score of the scheme, and the series of combat actions made for achieving the combat intention of the scheme. Wherein equipment deployment data, a scenario's deductive field average score is abstracted as a variable member of a class, and combat actions are abstracted as a function member of a class, and an interface is provided for specific implementation.
In summary, the software implementation of the present invention adopts an object-oriented design concept to abstract a scheme class and a scheme management class; by adopting a software design concept of 'loose coupling between modules and high cohesion inside the modules', business logic is reasonably divided, and closely-connected logic functions are aggregated together to form a complete functional module; and a classical factory mode in a design mode is adopted, so that a new scheme is convenient to create and define.
The upper layer in fig. 1 is a scheme management module, and the lower layer is a scheme definition module responsible for each specific scheme. The scheme management module is mainly responsible for creating schemes, switching schemes, maintaining information data necessary for management, interacting with an intelligent resistant deduction environment, applying the schemes to each deduction, and adjusting scheme priority according to feedback of deduction results, wherein the scheme management module does not relate to specific logics or implementation details of each scheme. The scheme definition module of the next layer only focuses on the specific implementation details of each scheme, such as military force deployment, combat action and the like, and does not consider the scheme management logic. By adopting the design idea, the scheme management is separated from the scheme realization, and each business class plays its own role, so that the software structure is clearer, and the project realization, debugging, and subsequent maintenance and upgrading of the software are facilitated.
In specific engineering implementation, due to the introduction of a 'factory model', software design mainly comprises 4 classes: the recipe management class, recipe factory class, recipe base class and recipe class, classes and their interrelation are shown in FIG. 2.
The scheme management class is responsible for management of basic information, common information and schemes, and scheme switching logic. The scheme class mainly comprises variable members corresponding to basic information of each scheme and interface members defining behavior logic. The recipe factory class is primarily used to instantiate specific recipe objects, and then specific behavior logic can be defined through interfaces in the recipe class. A scheme factory class object is arranged in the scheme management class, and a user can 'produce' a new scheme through the factory object and further define data and behaviors of the new scheme by calling an interface of the new scheme object.
The sequence of message interactions between the relevant scenario management and deduction system, and the users is shown in figure 3.
After the user successfully opens the deduction system, the system instantiates a scenario management object in the background. Then, the user defines several schemes according to the pre-designed scheme and the given interface of the system, and at this time, an initial optimal scheme is determined as a default scheme for deduction to start. Then, the user sets the total number of deductions, and starts deduction to enter a deduction cycle. In the circulation, after each minimum trial field number deduction, the deduction statistical result is updated, the priority ordering of the schemes is adjusted correspondingly, the optimal scheme is determined again, the deduction scheme is switched to the current optimal scheme, and then the minimum trial field number deduction is carried out until all deductions are finished. Finally, the deduction overall result is returned.
Example 2
The multi-scheme intelligent switching system under the deduction simulation environment can realize that:
an intelligent confrontation-oriented multi-scheme autonomous switching method comprises the following steps:
s1, acquiring a predetermined action scheme list of the own party; the list of own-party action scenarios includes at least one own-party action scenario;
s2, switching the action schemes from the own action scheme list to carry out antagonism by using an antagonism deduction simulation system based on the number of preset antagonism deduction fields, and sequencing the action schemes in the own action scheme list according to the antagonism result;
and S3, determining an optimal action scheme based on the own action scheme sequencing result.
Preferably, the utilizing countermeasure simulation system switches the action schemes from the own-party action scheme list for countermeasure based on a preset number of countermeasure sessions, and sorts the action schemes in the own-party action scheme list according to the countermeasure result, including:
step 1: selecting a first personal action profile from a predetermined personal action profile list;
step 2: carrying out countermeasures by utilizing an intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system based on the own action scheme and the opposite action scheme, and recording the countermeasures; determining the own action scheme of the next countermeasure from the own action scheme list according to the countermeasure situation, judging whether the countermeasure deduction field is reached, and if so, ending the execution; otherwise, executing step 3;
and step 3: after all action schemes in the own action scheme list are executed, all own action schemes in the own action scheme list are sequenced based on historical confrontation conditions;
and 4, step 4: and (3) selecting the first own action scheme from the sorted own action scheme list to execute the step (2) until a preset countermeasure field is reached, and ending the execution.
Preferably, the recording of the confrontational situation comprises:
record the r-th of the own action plan i i Score of field fight deduction
Historical deduction total score of current action scheme i
And corresponding historical deduction field average score
Preferably, the historical deduction total score of the current action scheme i
The calculation formula (2) is as follows;
historical field average score of the current action plan i
Is calculated as follows:
in the formula, r i The derived number of fields for the current action scenario i;
score of the j-th fight deduction of the own action scheme i, wherein j has a value of 1 to r i 。
Preferably, before the selecting the first own-party action scenario from the predetermined list of own-party action scenarios, the method further comprises:
setting a minimum trial deduction field number min (R) for each action plan test )；
The minimum heuristic field number min (R) test ) And calculating and determining according to the deduction result confidence epsilon of the system and the deduction result confidence E expected by the user.
Preferably, the minimum heuristic field number min (R) test ) The calculation formula (2) is as follows;
where E is the confidence of the derived result desired by the user and E is the confidence of the derived result of the system.
Preferably, the determining the own action scheme of the next confrontation from the own action scheme list according to the confrontation condition includes:
if the local party wins, the currently selected local party action scheme in the local party action scheme list is the local party action scheme for next countermeasure, otherwise, whether the countermeasure frequency of the current local party action scheme and the current opposite party action scheme reaches the minimum heuristic deduction field number min (R) test )；
When the minimum trial deduction field number min (R) is not reached test ) If the current selected action scheme is not selected, the next scheme of the currently selected scheme in the own action scheme list is selected as the own action scheme of the next countermeasure.
Preferably, the ranking all the personal action schemes in the personal action scheme list based on each confrontational situation includes:
historical court-average score based on each scheme in the list of own-party action schemes
And (6) sorting.
Preferably, the switching the action plan from the own action plan list to the countermeasure further comprises:
initializing at least one or more parameters of: the total number I of schemes preset by the user, the total number R of deductions, the confidence E of deduction results expected by the user, and the initial value ps of the success rate of each action scheme of the local system i And an initial value of the single-field derived expectation score
Setting initial value ps of activity plan winning degree for the own-party activity plan in the own-party activity plan list i Setting the initial sequence of the own action scheme list according to the initial value of the success rate of the action scheme;
calculating and determining a minimum heuristic deduction field min (R) according to the deduction result confidence coefficient epsilon of the system and the deduction result confidence coefficient E expected by the user test )。
Preferably, the action scheme based on the own party and the action scheme based on the opposite party are confronted by using an intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system, and the confrontation situation is recorded, and then the method further comprises the following steps:
and judging whether the opposite side action scheme is a new opposite side action scheme or not, and if so, storing the opposite side action scheme in an opposite side action scheme list.
Preferably, the determining whether the peer action plan is a new peer action plan includes:
acquiring initial deployment positions of the counter equipment and each equipment based on an intelligent counter deduction simulation system, and taking the deployment positions of the counter equipment and each equipment as an action scheme;
comparing the action scheme with all pre-stored countermeasure action schemes, and when the action scheme is different from all the countermeasure action schemes, determining the action scheme as a new action scheme of the countermeasure;
all stored countermeasure action scenarios include: equipment and an initial deployment location for each equipment.
The variables used in the above process are shown in Table 1
Variables used in Table 1
The confidence coefficient epsilon of each deduction result is set in the system, represents the credibility of the deduction result, is determined by the design and implementation of the system, is not set by a user, and does not change along with the change of deduction conditions; the expected deduction result confidence level E is set by the user according to the preference of the user, and represents the user's satisfactory and expected deduction result confidence level. From the two parameters a minimum heuristic field number min (R) can be determined test ) I.e. the confidence level of the deduction result which is approved and convincing by the user is reached, and the minimum deduction field is needed. Typically, the confidence level E of the desired derived result set by the user is greater than the confidence level E of the derived result per field set in the system, and at least min (R) is needed test ) And performing field deduction, namely improving the confidence coefficient of the deduction result, so that the user considers that the deduction result reaches the satisfaction degree, and the overall winning probability and score of the currently adopted combat scheme are credible and available.
The correlation calculation formula is as follows
After the formula is deformed, obtain
Similarly, a single-field deduction expectation score s is set exp A minimum score is derived for a single field indicating user satisfaction, and an initial value is set by the user
After the deduction begins, firstly sorting the action schemes from high to low according to the initial value of the success rate of each action scheme, and selecting the action scheme with the first sorting for min (R) test ) Performing field deduction, calculating the average score of a single field, if the average score is lower than the expected score of the current single field deduction, considering that the action scheme is not ideal after deduction verification, putting the action scheme at the tail of a sequencing queue, and automatically switching the next action scheme in the current sequencing to prepare for next deduction; otherwise, continuing to keep the current action scheme for continuing min (R) test ) And (4) field deduction. And the process is circulated until the deduction is finished.
The technical solution provided by the present invention is further described as shown in fig. 4:
1): and (6) initializing an algorithm.
1.1) initializing each parameter, including the total number I of the scheme preset by the user, the total number R of the deduction fields, the confidence E of the deduction result expected by the user, the initial value ps of the success rate of each action scheme of the local i And an initial value of the single-field derived expectation score
1.2): initial value ps of winning degree according to action scheme i And arranging the user preset schemes according to the reverse order to obtain a priority ordered list, and initializing a list pointer to point to the first scheme.
2): calculating a minimum heuristic deriving field min (R) according to the system deriving result confidence epsilon and the user desired deriving result confidence E test ) The specific calculation is shown in formula (3).
3): selecting the action scheme i pointed by the list pointer in the priority list to carry out min (R) test ) Field deduction, recording each field deduction score, and calculating min (R) test ) Historical deduction total score of field heuristic deduction
And corresponding historical deduction field average score
4): it is determined whether all of the activity schemes in the current list have been derived.
(1) If yes, namely all intents in the current list are rotated, the intents are reordered according to the field-average scores of the intents to obtain a new priority list, the list pointer is reset to be 1, the action scheme corresponding to the pointer is selected for next field deduction, and the step 5) is carried out.
(2) If not, the list pointer points to the next action scheme in the current prioritized list and selects the action scheme for the next deduction, go to step 3).
5): for number r of derived fields i And (6) judging.
If r is i <R updates R i ＝r i +1, go to step 3); otherwise, the algorithm ends.
Example 3
In embodiments 1 and 2, the method for judging whether the opposite action scheme is a new opposite action scheme may be an action scheme prejudging method for deduction simulation, and the method includes:
1) acquiring counterside equipment and an initial deployment position thereof based on an intelligent counterside deduction simulation system, and taking each equipment of the counterside and the deployment position thereof as alternative action schemes;
2) comparing the alternative action scheme with all prestored countermeasure action schemes, and when the alternative action scheme is not the same as the prestored countermeasure action schemes, determining the alternative action scheme as a new action scheme intention of the countermeasure;
the countermeasure action scheme includes: equipment and initial deployment positions of the equipment; all stored countermeasure action scenarios include: history deduces the discovered and stored countermeasure action scheme.
Wherein, 1) obtaining the initial deployment positions of the countermeasure equipment and each equipment based on the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system comprises:
when the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system starts to execute countermeasures, all equipment of the countermeasures and the coordinate positions of all the equipment are obtained;
the alternative action scheme is represented by an array vector composed of the number of each equipment and the coordinate position sequence of each equipment;
the coordinate locations comprise binary arrays or ternary arrays.
The initial deployment position of the equipment in the countermeasure action scheme is a coordinate position; here, the coordinate positions include: a binary array or a ternary array.
Further, comparing the alternative action scheme with all the pre-stored countermeasure action schemes, and when the alternative action scheme is not the same as the pre-stored countermeasure action scheme, the alternative action scheme is determined as a new action scheme of the countermeasure, including:
step 1: selecting a first action plan from the list of countermeasure action plans;
step 2: expressing the currently selected action scheme by an array vector consisting of the serial numbers of all equipment and the coordinate position sequence of all the equipment in the currently selected action scheme;
and step 3: calculating the Euclidean distance between the alternative action scheme and the current selected action scheme;
and 4, step 4: judging the similarity between the action scheme and the currently selected action scheme based on the Euclidean distance;
and 5: when the similarity is within the range of the set threshold value, the alternative action scheme and the current selected action scheme are the same scheme or similar scheme, and the comparison is finished; otherwise, executing step 6;
step 6: judging whether an action scheme which is not selected exists in the action scheme list or not, if so, continuing to obtain the next action scheme from the action scheme list, and executing the step 2; if not, the action scheme is confirmed as a new action scheme of the confrontation party, and the comparison is finished;
wherein the countermeasure action profile is stored in the form of an action profile list.
Further, calculating the euclidean distance between the candidate action scheme and the current action scheme includes:
respectively calculating Euclidean distances between the array vectors corresponding to the action scheme and the equipment in the vector data corresponding to the current action scheme;
and weighting according to the importance of each device, and calculating the Euclidean distance between the array vector corresponding to the action scheme and the array vector corresponding to the current action scheme.
Further, when the coordinate position is a binary array, the calculation formula of the euclidean distance between the devices in different schemes is as follows:
in the formula (I), the compound is shown in the specification,
the Euclidean distance between the alternative action scheme i and the current action scheme j for the equipment n of the confrontation party s;
coordinate positions of the alternative action scheme i and the current action scheme j on an x axis respectively;
coordinate positions of the alternative action scheme i and the current action scheme j on the y axis respectively;
when the coordinate position is a ternary array, the calculation formula of the Euclidean distance of each device among different schemes is as follows:
in the formula (I), the compound is shown in the specification,
the coordinate positions of the alternative action scheme i and the current action scheme j on the z-axis are respectively.
Further, the calculation formula of the euclidean distance between the array vectors is as follows:
in the formula (I), the compound is shown in the specification,
the Euclidean distance between the alternative action scheme i and the current action scheme j for equipment n of a competitor s;
the weighted Euclidean distance between two array vectors of the schemes i and j;
equip s with the weight of n in all the equipments of s.
Further, the similarity is calculated as follows:
in the formula, f is similarity;
the weighted Euclidean distance between two array vectors of the schemes i and j;
the distance from the array vector corresponding to the alternative action scheme i to the origin of the coordinate system is s;
and the distance from the array vector corresponding to the s-party current action scheme j to the origin of the coordinate system.
Further, after the alternative action scheme is identified as the new action scheme of the countermeasure, the method further comprises the following steps: storing the new action plan in an adversary action plan list.
By using the deduction simulation-oriented action scheme prejudging method provided by the embodiment, by deeply considering and analyzing situation information of both parties of an action and on the basis of the strength of both parties, a plurality of sets of combat schemes are formulated in advance, so that before the actual start of the action, according to the acquired situation information and historical confrontation data, scheme switching time is determined to select the most appropriate action scheme, and the winning probability is greatly improved.
The variables used for the algorithm and their meanings are shown in table 2.
TABLE 2 variables for the action plan prejudgment Algorithm
Supplementary explanation:
1. the algorithm uses the equipment initial deployment position to represent the action plan, so the action plan can be expressed as
2. The scheme similarity threshold is the maximum deviation of the two schemes set by the user, and is used as a standard for judging whether the schemes are close or similar.
The assumed conditions of the algorithm are as follows:
1. joint action intelligent confrontation is carried out with Round field deduction;
2. each side has N s The device is characterized in that the device is a seed device,
3. each device to which each party belongs has an importance weight,
4. the action schemes adopted by each deduction of the two parties are not disclosed;
5. the scheme similarity threshold is set by the user according to the preference.
The objective function of the algorithm is:
wherein f is the similarity;
acting for weighted Euclidean distance between two array vectors of the schemes i and j;
the distance from the array vector corresponding to the s-party alternative action scheme i to the origin of the coordinate system where the array vector is located;
and the distance from the array vector corresponding to the s-party current action scheme j to the origin of the coordinate system.
Since the purpose of the algorithm is to determine whether two action schemes are similar or similar, or even identical, based on representing the action schemes by array vectors, two array vectors (abbreviated as "array vectors") are used
) The weighted Euclidean distance between them is used as the main judgment basis. In order to more intuitively represent the magnitude of the weighted Euclidean distance, normalization processing is carried out by comparing the weighted Euclidean distance with the Euclidean distance from a certain array vector to the origin of coordinates, and the ratio is used as a final objective function. In selecting the array vector to be compared, the objective function adopts the scheme of selecting the larger one, namely, the method uses
As a denominator to reduce the error that may result from choosing the smaller. Comparing any objective function value with a similarity threshold preset by a user, if the objective function value is greater than or equal to the threshold, considering the difference between the two compared action schemes to be within an acceptable range, and judging that the two action schemes are similar or close to each other; otherwise, the difference between the two action schemes is considered to be larger, and the two action schemes are judged to be different.
The technical solution provided by the present invention is further introduced as shown in fig. 5:
1: and (6) initializing an algorithm. The recipe is assumed to be red. The initial deduction field r is 1, and the recorded countermeasure is a blue party action scheme list
If the number of the mobile equipment is null, the importance weight of the mobile equipment in the local is initialized
(when the present is the blue square, the algorithm is similar).
2: go to the r' field deduction. First according to the recorded Bluetooth action scheme list
The length of (c) is temporarily recorded as the jth action scheme of the blue party,
obtaining initial deployment positions of various equipment of bluesquare through intelligence reconnaissance
Blue-side action scheme
Can be expressed as an array vector consisting of all equipment initial deployment positions of the blue square in equipment numbering order, i.e.
3: and judging whether the other party adopts a new action scheme.
3.1 traversal List
Initializing list pointer j equals 1
3.2 selection List
Blue-side action scheme pointed by middle list pointer
Calculating the Euclidean distance between two array vectors according to the corresponding array vectors and weighted by the equipment importance weight, wherein the specific formula is as follows:
in the formula
The Euclidean distance between the action scheme i and the current action scheme j for equipment n of a countermeasure s;
the weighted Euclidean distance between two array vectors of the schemes i and j;
equip s with the weight of n in all the equipments of s.
And 3.3, calculating an objective function value f according to an objective function calculation formula, and comparing the objective function value f with a similarity threshold theta set by a user. If f is less than theta, namely the similarity is less than the threshold value, the two array vectors are considered to be different, and the step 3.4 is switched; otherwise, if the similarity is greater than or equal to the threshold, the two array vectors are considered to be basically the same, and step 3.5 is performed.
3.4 comparing j with the List Length
And judging whether the list is traversed or not. If it is
Turning to step 3.2 if the traversal is not finished; otherwise, the traversal is completed, and step 3.6 is performed.
3.5 because the two array vectors are determined to be substantially the same, consider the current course of action taken by the blue party
Action scheme pointed to by list pointer j
Similar or identical, i.e. action schemes
Not belonging to a new course of action, not added to a list
3.6 if the list is traversed, the array vector corresponding to the current blue-party action scheme is different from or similar to any array vector in the list, so that the blue-party action scheme can be judged to belong to a new action scheme which is not recorded in the list, and the array vector is added into the list.
4: it is checked whether the deduction is over. If R is less than R, indicating that the derived field number is less than the preset total field number, adding 1 to the field number, changing R to R +1, turning to 2, and continuing to perform field derivation; otherwise, the algorithm ends.
Example 4
In this embodiment, a specific test case is used to verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the multi-scheme intelligent switching system provided by the present invention in the simulation environment.
The existing set of intelligent deduction simulation system has the deduction scene of sea-air combined fighting against the island. The user is the red side, the system intelligence is the blue side, and both deduction parties can set multiple sets of combat schemes in advance. The total number of the deductions is set to be 30, the total score accumulated by the 30 deductions is used as the score of the opposite deductions of the two parties, and the win-loss is judged by comparing the scores of the two parties.
Suppose that: the built-in deduction confidence level of the system is 0.5, and the deduction result confidence level expected by the user is 0.9; the system is preset with 2 schemes, and the user is preset with 3 battle schemes T 1 ，T 2 ，T 3 The corresponding initial odds are 0.8, 0.7 and 0.6; the user set deduction field desired score is 40.
According to the method and the assumption, the minimum trial deduction field number min (R) is calculated and determined through the built-in deduction credibility epsilon of the system, the user self-set expected credibility E and the total deduction field number R test )：
Calculated by the formula (4)
R test ≥4
To ensure that the number of derived fields is the same in each experiment, the total number of fields R is required to be equal to R test Integer division so that final determination is
min(R test )＝5
Therefore, the total number of derived fields is 30, and the minimum number of derived fields is 5, i.e. the derived statistics are updated every 5 fields, so that 5 consecutive fields are called a small trial derivation. Meanwhile, initializing a user preset scheme priority queue Q according to the initial winning degree of each scheme preset by the user<T 1 ,T 2 ,T 3 >。
The deduction process is as follows:
1. first small round of test deduction
Deduction field 1-5, user uses T 1 According to the scheme, the small round of the red square field is scored by 20. The blue square field is divided into 40 points, and the blue square is judged to basically adopt the same fighting scheme by analyzing the posture at the beginning of deduction, which is named as P 1 e 。
2. Second small round of test deduction
Deduction field 6-10, user changes to T 2 In the scheme, the small round of red squares have a score of 42. The blue square field is divided into 22, and the situation analysis at the beginning of deduction judges that the blue square still adopts P 1 e A scheme of battle.
3. Third small round test deduction
Deduction fields 11-15, user uses T 2 Scheme, this small round of red squares scored 37. The blue square field is divided into 36 points, and the situation analysis at the beginning of deduction judges that the blue square adopts a different combat scheme from the former one, namely the blue square field is named as
4. Fourth small round test deduction
Deduction field 16-20, user continues to use T 2 According to the scheme, the small round of the red square field is scored by 40. The blue square field is divided into 22, and the P is adopted by the blue square through the analysis of the posture at the beginning of deduction 1 e A scheme of battle.
5. Fifth small round test deduction
The user still uses T in the deduction fields 21-25 2 In the scheme, the small round of red squares have a score of 35. The blue square field is scored 35, and the situation analysis at the beginning of deduction judges that the blue square is changed into the blue square
A scheme of battle.
6. Sixth small round test deduction
A deduction field 26-30 for use by a userT 2 In the scheme, the small round of red squares have a score of 42. The blue square field is divided into 19, and the situation analysis at the beginning of deduction judges that the blue square is changed into P 1 e A scheme of battle.
Comparative summary
Around the main innovation point of multi-scenario autonomous online switching, two comparative cases were designed as shown in table 1 and continued to be tested using the above-described case.
Table 1 protocol switching method comparison
Wherein, the first contrast condition is set by only adopting the current user default optimal scheme T 1 Performing deduction of all fields; the second setting of the comparison case is that the multi-scheme switching is still performed, and the switching method is to perform switching at fixed intervals according to a prearranged sequence, rather than switching according to a deduction statistical result as proposed by the present invention. In both cases, the same deduction is performed, and in the second case, the scheme switching is performed every 5 fields.
The results of the deduction for the two comparative cases are shown in table 2.
Table 2 two comparative deductions
Further, statistics on the solution switching method provided by the present invention and the results obtained by deducting the two comparison conditions are shown in fig. 6. It can be seen from the figure that the effect of the scheme using method in the comparison case 1 is the worst, the red side is completely out of the blue side, the effect in the comparison case 2 is better than that in the comparison case 1, but the red side is still output to the blue side with certain disadvantage, the effect of the invention is the best, and the red side is superior to the blue side with certain advantage.
Summary of analysis
1. Prejudgement on the intent of combat
In the deduction process, in the test deduction of the third small round to the sixth small round, whether the blue square adopts different combat schemes can be discriminated and judged according to the initial equipment deployment position information of each deduction blue square, and powerful bases are provided for repeated analysis of the benefit and the disadvantage of the combat schemes after the deduction is finished.
2. Handover with respect to in-process scenarios
The software of the invention can realize the autonomous online switching among multiple schemes according to the rules set by the method, and manual pause intervention is not needed in the deduction process.
After the first small round of test deduction is finished, the red square field is evenly scored to be 20 and lower than the user expected score, and the blue square field is evenly scored to be 40, so that the scheme management selects the scheme T to be changed to the scheme T 2 (ii) a The second small round of experiment deduction, blue side does not change the initial deployment position of the equipment, show that its combat intention and corresponding combat scheme have not changed, after this small round of conclusion, red side field average score is improved to 42, exceed the desired satisfaction value, and blue side field average score is reduced to 22; third, a small round of trial deduction, project management still uses project T 2 The result outperforms the blue square with weak dominance; fourth, a small round of trial deduction, plan management continues using plan T 2 As a result, the red square field is divided into 40 to reach a satisfactory value, and the blue square field is divided into 22; fifth, performing small round of test deduction, wherein scheme management keeps the current scheme unchanged, and meanwhile, the bluer is observed to change the initial equipment deployment position, compared with the recorded characteristics of the bluer combat scheme, the bluer is judged to be changed into the previous set of combat scheme, the deduction result is that the average score of the redside field is reduced, the average score of the blueside field is increased, and the redside field and the blueside field are kept equal; and a sixth small round of experiment deduction, wherein the current scheme is still kept unchanged because the red square is not input in the previous round, the fighting scheme is continuously changed by the blue square, the opposite situation of the schemes of the two parties is the same as that of the fourth round, the red square field is equally scored for 42 at this time, the blue square field is equally scored for 19 at this time, and the result is basically consistent with that of the fourth round within an allowable range by considering the influence of random factors.
3. Comparison between methods of use with respect to three different protocols
It can be seen from the above comparison tests that for multi-session intelligent countermeasure deduction, the design and use of the scheme, including whether the scheme is switched or not, and how to switch, will have a great influence on the final deduction result and score. Therefore, it is necessary to study whether to perform scheme switching and how to design a reasonable scheme switching method, and to propose a scheme switching method that meets the actual needs to ensure that a desired deduction result and score can be obtained.
The above multi-disk analysis shows that the scheme management can independently switch the scheme on line according to the set experimental deduction field number and the field average result, and redefines the scheme priority according to the historical result, thereby achieving the expected design purpose of the method and the software.
It is to be understood that the embodiments described are only a few embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. All other embodiments, which can be derived by a person skilled in the art from the embodiments given herein without making any creative effort, shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, embodiments of the present application may be provided as a method, system, or computer program product. Accordingly, the present application may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, the present application may take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including, but not limited to, disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, and the like) having computer-usable program code embodied therein.
The present application is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the application. It will be understood that each flow and/or block of the flow diagrams and/or block diagrams, and combinations of flows and/or blocks in the flow diagrams and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, embedded processor, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart flow or flows and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce an article of manufacture including instruction means which implement the function specified in the flowchart flow or flows and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart flow or flows and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The present invention is not limited to the above embodiments, and any modifications, equivalent replacements, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present invention are included in the scope of the claims of the present invention which are filed as the application.
Claims (11)
1. A multi-scheme intelligent switching system in a deduction simulation environment is characterized by comprising:
the scheme definition module is used for statically defining various action schemes based on the factory mode, and the static definition of each action scheme comprises the following steps: scheme name and force deployment; the force deployment is embodied by equipment;
the scheme management module is used for instantiating a plurality of action schemes defined in the scheme definition module based on the factory mode; and the system is also used for data interaction with the intelligent confrontation deduction simulation system in the confrontation process.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the force deployment comprises: various equipment and initial coordinates of the equipment.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the schema definition module comprises: a solution base class and a plurality of solution classes implemented for the solution base classes; each scheme class corresponds to one scheme;
the scheme base class is used for defining variable members of scheme basic information and interface members of behavior logic;
wherein the variable members include at least one or more of: scheme name, equipment model, number and deployment position; the interface members include at least equipment action plans.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the data interaction comprises: switching the instantiated action scheme based on the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system; and maintaining each instantiated action scheme according to the deduction condition of the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the schema management module is implemented by a schema management class: the project management class comprises a project factory class;
the schema factory class is used to define specific behavior logic through interfaces in each schema class to instantiate specific schema objects.
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the solution management module comprises:
the scheme creating submodule is used for calling the scheme factory class to instantiate each action scheme and storing the action scheme in the scheme list;
the management data maintenance submodule is used for maintaining information of each action scheme in a deduction maintenance scheme list based on the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system;
and the scheme switching sub-module is used for selecting an action scheme of the next deduction from the scheme list based on the deduction of the intelligent countermeasure deduction simulation system.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein the course of action for the next confrontation comprises:
when the self wins after the deduction is finished, the current action scheme is kept as the action scheme of the next deduction, otherwise, whether the confrontation of the current self action scheme and the opposite action scheme reaches the minimum trial deduction field number min (R) test )；
If the minimum heuristic field number min (R) is not reached test ) If so, the current action scheme is continuously used; if the minimum heuristic field number min (R) has been reached test ) Then switching to the next action scheme of the current action scheme in the scheme list as the action scheme of the next deduction.
8. The system of claim 7, wherein the minimum heuristic pull field number min (R) is test ) The calculation formula (2) is as follows;
where E is the confidence of the derived result desired by the user and E is the confidence of the derived result of the system.
9. The system of claim 6, wherein the management data maintenance submodule is specifically configured to:
acquiring a predetermined own scheme list; the list of own-party solutions includes at least one own-party action solution;
and switching the action schemes from the own scheme list to carry out countermeasure by using a countermeasure simulation system based on the preset number of countermeasure fields, and maintaining the information of each action scheme in the own scheme list according to each countermeasure result.
10. The system of claim 9, wherein the information for each activity scheme comprises: ranking of action plans, action plan i fight against deduction history total score
And historical field average score
11. The system of claim 9,
the action plan i confrontation deduction history total score
The calculation formula (2) is as follows;
in the formula, r i The derived number of fields for the current action scenario i;
is as follows; score of j' th fight deduction of own action plan i;
the action plan i historical field average score
Is calculated as follows:
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202210455401.0A CN114862168B (en) | 2022-04-27 | 2022-04-27 | Multi-scheme intelligent switching system under deduction simulation environment |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202210455401.0A CN114862168B (en) | 2022-04-27 | 2022-04-27 | Multi-scheme intelligent switching system under deduction simulation environment |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN114862168A true CN114862168A (en) | 2022-08-05 |
| CN114862168B CN114862168B (en) | 2023-06-06 |
Family
ID=82633510
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202210455401.0A Active CN114862168B (en) | 2022-04-27 | 2022-04-27 | Multi-scheme intelligent switching system under deduction simulation environment |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN114862168B (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN117670095A (en) * | 2024-01-30 | 2024-03-08 | 中国人民解放军军事科学院国防科技创新研究院 | Method and device for generating action plan of multi-agent autonomous countermeasure drive |
Citations (8)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20040093516A1 (en) * | 2002-11-12 | 2004-05-13 | Hornbeek Marc William Anthony | System for enabling secure remote switching, robotic operation and monitoring of multi-vendor equipment |
| CN103593516A (en) * | 2013-10-30 | 2014-02-19 | 中国运载火箭技术研究院 | Combat system modeling and simulation system |
| CN106952014A (en) * | 2017-02-10 | 2017-07-14 | 南京航空航天大学 | A kind of battle plan optimization method based on Military Simulation device |
| WO2020019474A1 (en) * | 2018-07-25 | 2020-01-30 | 西安交通大学 | Optimal power backoff-based non-orthogonal random access method in large-scale m2m network |
| CN113705102A (en) * | 2021-08-31 | 2021-11-26 | 湖南苍树航天科技有限公司 | Deduction simulation system, method, equipment and storage medium for sea-air cluster confrontation |
| CN113781856A (en) * | 2021-07-19 | 2021-12-10 | 中国人民解放军国防科技大学 | Joint combat weapon equipment application training simulation system and implementation method thereof |
| CN113779810A (en) * | 2021-09-27 | 2021-12-10 | 中国人民解放军国防大学联合作战学院指挥信息系统演训中心 | Army contract combat scheme simulation experiment decision control system and simulation control method |
| CN113919068A (en) * | 2021-10-08 | 2022-01-11 | 中国人民解放军空军工程大学 | Task-based aviation equipment support system simulation evaluation method |
-
2022
- 2022-04-27 CN CN202210455401.0A patent/CN114862168B/en active Active
Patent Citations (8)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20040093516A1 (en) * | 2002-11-12 | 2004-05-13 | Hornbeek Marc William Anthony | System for enabling secure remote switching, robotic operation and monitoring of multi-vendor equipment |
| CN103593516A (en) * | 2013-10-30 | 2014-02-19 | 中国运载火箭技术研究院 | Combat system modeling and simulation system |
| CN106952014A (en) * | 2017-02-10 | 2017-07-14 | 南京航空航天大学 | A kind of battle plan optimization method based on Military Simulation device |
| WO2020019474A1 (en) * | 2018-07-25 | 2020-01-30 | 西安交通大学 | Optimal power backoff-based non-orthogonal random access method in large-scale m2m network |
| CN113781856A (en) * | 2021-07-19 | 2021-12-10 | 中国人民解放军国防科技大学 | Joint combat weapon equipment application training simulation system and implementation method thereof |
| CN113705102A (en) * | 2021-08-31 | 2021-11-26 | 湖南苍树航天科技有限公司 | Deduction simulation system, method, equipment and storage medium for sea-air cluster confrontation |
| CN113779810A (en) * | 2021-09-27 | 2021-12-10 | 中国人民解放军国防大学联合作战学院指挥信息系统演训中心 | Army contract combat scheme simulation experiment decision control system and simulation control method |
| CN113919068A (en) * | 2021-10-08 | 2022-01-11 | 中国人民解放军空军工程大学 | Task-based aviation equipment support system simulation evaluation method |
Non-Patent Citations (2)
| Title |
|---|
| 谢保川等: "基于HLA的战场环境仿真系统设计", 《指挥控制与仿真》 * |
| 邓克波等: "面向作战方案分析的计算机兵棋推演系统", 《指挥信息系统与技术》 * |
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN117670095A (en) * | 2024-01-30 | 2024-03-08 | 中国人民解放军军事科学院国防科技创新研究院 | Method and device for generating action plan of multi-agent autonomous countermeasure drive |
| CN117670095B (en) * | 2024-01-30 | 2024-05-10 | 中国人民解放军军事科学院国防科技创新研究院 | Method and device for generating action plan of multi-agent autonomous countermeasure drive |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN114862168B (en) | 2023-06-06 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US7296007B1 (en) | Real time context learning by software agents | |
| KR102046896B1 (en) | Information processing device, game program, and information processing method | |
| CN112215364B (en) | Method and system for determining depth of enemy-friend based on reinforcement learning | |
| US20230280873A1 (en) | Interface display method and apparatus, device, and storage medium | |
| US11260306B2 (en) | Matchmaking for online gaming with simulated players | |
| Grenager et al. | Dispersion games: general definitions and some specific learning results | |
| CN108211361A (en) | Resource acquisition method of determining probability and device, storage medium, electronic device | |
| CN114862168A (en) | Multi-scheme intelligent switching system under deduction simulation environment | |
| CN111494959A (en) | Game control method and device, electronic equipment and computer readable storage medium | |
| CN113926196A (en) | Control method and device for virtual game role, storage medium and electronic device | |
| Bowling et al. | Plays as team plans for coordination and adaptation | |
| Gemine et al. | Imitative learning for real-time strategy games | |
| US11786818B2 (en) | Autoplayers for filling and testing online games | |
| Peng et al. | Continual match based training in Pommerman: Technical report | |
| Zhu et al. | A q-values sharing framework for multi-agent reinforcement learning under budget constraint | |
| Ho et al. | Contract bridge bidding by learning | |
| Youssef et al. | Building your kingdom imitation learning for a custom gameplay using unity ml-agents | |
| CN114882755B (en) | Intelligent countermeasure-oriented multi-scheme autonomous switching method | |
| CN115017677B (en) | Action strategy pre-judging method and system for deduction simulation | |
| Akiyama et al. | Learning Evaluation Function for RoboCup Soccer Simulation using Humans' Choice | |
| CN111882072A (en) | Intelligent model automatic course training method for playing chess with rules | |
| CN116531758A (en) | Virtual character control method, virtual character control device, storage medium and electronic device | |
| Malikovic et al. | Artificial intelligent player's planning in massively multi-player on-line role-playing games | |
| Khatri | The gaming experience with AI | |
| Tsapanos et al. | A zeroth-level classifier system for real time strategy games |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |