RU2469386C2 - Method and apparatus for selecting strategy of assigning targets to group objects - Google Patents

Abstract

FIELD: information technology.

SUBSTANCE: apparatus for selecting a strategy for assigning targets to group objects has a switch and four memory units, a control unit, two comparator units, three arithmetic units, a display unit, a multiplier unit and a logic unit. The display unit and outputs of the control unit are connected to control inputs of all units. The method describes operation of the apparatus.

EFFECT: wider range of equipment owing to design of a method and apparatus for selecting the strategy of assigning targets to group objects.

2 cl, 1 dwg

Description

The invention relates to digital computing, and in particular to digital computing systems for processing input information about the characteristics of military equipment, its transformation, choosing the necessary strategy, forming confrontation criteria with revealing the results of military operations (victory, defeat, parity), assessing your losses and damage damage to the enemy, assessing the impact of the presence and absence of intelligence on the coordinates of military assets on the results of hostilities, identifying situations in which the choice of strategy does not give tons of combat effect, can be used by the command staff of the Armed Forces in the process of training and retraining, conducting command and staff exercises and directly for planning group combat operations. The technical result is the expansion of the arsenal of technical means by creating a method and device for choosing a target distribution strategy for group objects.

The known method [1-4], which reveals the dynamics of the battle and allows you to name the future winner. However, the method of warfare (DB) against heterogeneous groups with an assessment of its effectiveness is not known. In the sources cited, firstly, the DB is not considered against the side consisting of groups including heterogeneous military assets (BSR) with unequal characteristics, so the choice of the correct strategy of group DBs cannot be given. Secondly, the price of the victory achieved is not estimated; there is no quantitative assessment of the maximum damage to the enemy in the event of victory or defeat from him. The third drawback in the conduct of the battle is the existing shift in emphasis towards the ratio of the number of BFR parties, and not the ratio of the intensities of firing by the parties, which leads to a decrease in combat effectiveness and even to the defeat of side A in group DBs.

A known method [5] that eliminates these disadvantages, but it does not fully take into account the specifics of maintaining the GDB. Firstly, taking into account the heterogeneity of not only the BSS of the parties, but also the professional level of the personnel in the management of this technique, for example, the use of terrain for stealth, the presence of combat experience, coherence, and other factors, leads to different probabilities of p _1A ≠ p _2A defeat of BSR and different rates of f _1A ≠ f _{2A of} the same BFs by side A. Hence the inequality of the intensities µ ₁ ≠ µ _{2 of} the firing of fire by military means in groups B ₁ and B ₂ arises. Thus, taking into account not only the varieties of types of BSS: airplanes, helicopters, guns, tanks, missiles, etc., but also the different preparedness, coordination, experience and professionalism of personnel of all parties, leads to a more adequate model of conducting military operations.

The second disadvantage is the fact that the method [5] does not indicate situations in which the use of any of the considered strategies does not increase the efficiency (effectiveness) of military operations.

The third disadvantage of the method [5] is the fact of non-accounting, in which the type and composition of the enemy’s base group are known, but the coordinates of their location are not known. In this situation, there is a need to choose a different strategy for maintaining GDB.

There are patents [6-9] aimed at creating equipment for receiving and implementing target designation that do not eliminate the identified shortcomings and do not solve the problem formulated by the authors.

Therefore, there is a need to develop such a method and device that would eliminate the noted drawbacks.

In contrast to the well-known methods of maintaining the GDB, the increase in combat effectiveness (effectiveness) in the present invention is carried out due to:

- taking into account both the heterogeneity of the BSR and the qualifications of the personnel of both sides;

- choosing the optimal strategy for maintaining the GDB if there is information about the coordinates of the enemy base units and in the absence thereof;

- assessing the outcome of the upcoming hostilities before they take place, predicting the price of victory over the enemy (assessing their losses), in case of defeat - causing maximum damage to the enemy with the determination of the number of remaining unaffected BSR;

- identifying situations in which the choice of strategy does not lead to an increase in combat effectiveness (effectiveness) in the GDB;

- choosing a rational strategy and assessing the effectiveness of the GDB, both in the presence and in the absence of information about the coordinates of the GSS in the GDB.

According to the invention, the technical result is achieved by switching the data of their combat assets and means of each enemy grouping, writing them to a memory block, in which they record the presence or absence of information on the coordinates of the combat means of the parties, which enters the logic block, information on quantitative and qualitative characteristics all military equipment is transferred to the inputs of all arithmetic units and to the multiplication unit, from the output of which the product of the intensity of the striking fire of side A by the intensity of each of the enemy’s groupings are compared in the first block of comparison with the same product of the intensity of the shooting fire of side A with another of the enemy’s groups, the comparison results are sent to the visualization block, reading from which determines the strategy of warfare, the value of the confrontation criterion is calculated in the first arithmetic block, compared it in the second unit of comparison with threshold values, the results of the comparison are fed to the visualization unit, the reading of which determines the outcome of hostilities, the remains one’s one-stage combat operations read out from the visualization block, the value of the confrontation criterion is calculated in the first arithmetic block , compare it in the second comparison unit with threshold values, the comparison results are fed to the visualization unit, the reading of which determines the outcome of hostilities, the remnants of their military assets or enemy assets are calculated respectively in the second and third arithmetic units and read from the visualization unit.

The essence of the method is as follows.

A mathematical description of two-way combat is known using differential equations of battle dynamics [1-4]. At the same time, each of the two sides A and B contains a grouping of homogeneous combat weapons (BSR).

It is of interest to consider bilateral databases with heterogeneous groups, when side A has homogeneous BSRs, but the personnel are prepared in different ways to μ ₁ ≠ μ ₂ to defeat each of the enemy’s groups. Opposing side B includes two heterogeneous groups B ₁ and B ₂ . Indicators of the BSR side A before the start of group databases will be:

M - the initial amount of military equipment;

μ ₁ = p _1A f _1A , μ ₂ = p _2A f _2A are the intensities of the BSr fire, proportional to the probabilities of hitting targets with one shot p _1A , p _2A and the rate of fire of the Bsf f _1A , f _2A , carried out by side A on the Bsr of groups B ₁ and In ₂ .

In the GDB process (t> 0), the decreasing value of M at time t is denoted by m (t).

Groupings B ₁ and B ₂ have similar indicators: N ₁ , λ ₁ = p ₁ f ₁ , n ₁ (t) and N ₂ , λ ₂ = p ₂ f ₂ , n ₂ (t) maintaining the database on the base side of side A.

At the same time the start of the battle with side A with groups B ₁ and B ₂ , depending on the initial data, the following problematic questions arise:

1) Which side will win?

2) is there a criterion (mathematical expression), substituting in which the source data before the beginning of the GDB, you can answer the first question?

3) what is the target allocation strategy to adhere to side A in the presence or absence of information on the coordinates of the BSR and how does it affect the effectiveness of the GDB?

4) at what price did the victory go, i.e. how much BSR is left on the winning side?

5) in case of defeat of party A, what is its strategy leading to maximum damage to the enemy, and what is it?

6) in what situations does the choice of strategy have no effect?

In the existing literature [1-4], when maintaining a database between two parties with homogeneous BSR, there are answers to the first two questions. The presence of two heterogeneous groups B ₁ and B ₂ at side B makes it difficult to get an answer to all the questions posed.

Group Combat Planning Strategies (GDBs) and their classification. Consider the following strategies for maintaining GB:

a) a two-stage GDB strategy, in which party A at the first stage selects the strategy S {A; B ₁ , B ₂ } - begins by all means to destroy the BSR group B ₁ (r ₁ = 1) or another strategy S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ }, when destruction begins with the group B ₂ (r ₂ = 1), and by all means leads the database to its complete destruction, at the second stage with the remaining military means, it destroys another group B ₂ (r ₂ = 1) or B ₁ (r ₁ = 1);

b) the strategy S {A; ∩B B _{1 2}} one-stage group actions (ESG) when party A selects an optimal relative number is r _1, that moiety B ₁ are maintained database part ₁ r m (t) of its IWU, and by grouping in the other part ₂ r ₂ m {t), where r ₁ + r ₂ = 1. GDB are carried out until the complete destruction of both groups (victory) or before their defeat;

c) the strategy S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ , B _о } of mixed group military operations (SRS), when party A chooses such a relative (not optimal) number r _{1 of} its assets, when the group B ₁ maintains a database with part r ₁ m (t) of its assets, and in grouping B _{2 the} other part is r ₂ m (t) BSr. If one of the groupings is destroyed earlier (B ₁ or B ₂ ), then the remaining funds incapacitate the remaining group B _about .

The optimal management of GDB, firstly, leads to maximizing damage to the enemy, and secondly, to minimizing one’s losses.

Differential equations of GDB with heterogeneous groups in the presence of information from the parties about the coordinates of the BSR. Unlike a database with homogeneous groups, in which they are carried out in a single stage, in this scenario, the battle takes place in two stages. Let the databases with the B ₁ group be conducted at the first stage, not paying attention to the B ₂ group (r ₁ = 1, r ₂ = 0; S {A; B ₁ , B ₂ }). Then the differential equations reflecting the GDB of the 1st stage in time t ₁ are written as follows:

The initial conditions for the 1st stage are the quantities:

After the destruction of the group B ₁ (N ₁ = 0), side A at the 2nd stage proceeds to the destruction of the group B ₂ , with r ₂ = 1 (r ₁ = 0). The second stage t ₂ correspond to differential equations

The initial conditions for the second stage are

The solution of equations (1a, b) and (2a, b), taking into account the initial conditions (1c) and (2c), yields formulas (3a), (3b) for the values of the remaining BSPs when side A wins, depending on the chosen strategies of CR S {A; B ₁ , B ₂ } or S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ }

An analysis of expressions (3a) or (3b) allows you to specify the choice of strategy without resorting to their calculation. Inequality

осуществляется только при выполнении неравенства λ₁µ₁>λ₂µ₂, как и обратного

при осуществлении λ₁µ₁<λ₂µ₂.

is carried out only if the inequality λ ₁ μ ₁ > λ ₂ μ ₂ , as well as the inverse

when implementing λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ .

This means that the DHB strategy is to first destroy the group B _i , then B _j if λ _i µ _i > λ _j µ _j .

The criteria for the victory of party A when using one or another strategy in the Children's Children's Hospital are the inequalities obtained by transforming formulas (3a), (3b)

square-dependent local classic combat superiority ratios:

стороны A по отношению к группировке B₁;- squared local combat superiority coefficient

side A with respect to group B ₁ ;

- the square of the local combat superiority coefficient of the group B ₂ in relation to the group B ₁ .

In formulas (4a) and (4b), designations are also introduced for the quantitative ratios of N _{12 of the} groups B ₁ and B ₂ and the qualitative ones of λ ₁₂ , λ ₂₁ , as well as the ratio of the intensities μ ₁₂ and μ ₂₁ , firing side A on groups B ₁ , B ₂ or B ₂ , B ₁

Formulas (4a) - (4d) show that the criteria for military superiority (outcome of upcoming databases) K _p (R) are determined by the initial data: D _A (M, p _1A , p _2A , f _1A , f _1A ), D _B1 (N ₁ , p ₁ , f ₁ ), D _В2 (N ₂ , p ₂ , f ₂ ) of parties A and B in the presence of reconnaissance (R) about the coordinates of the BSR of the parties.

When K _p (R)> 1, “Victory of Side A” is recorded and, depending on the chosen strategy, one of the formulas (3a) or (3b) calculates the value of the remaining BSR of side A M ₂ (A; B ₁ , B ₂ ) or M ₁ (A; B ₂ , B ₁ ) (“Residue BSr M ₂ = ...” or “Remainder M ₁ = ...”).

With the inequality K _p (R) <1 - defeat of side A, the damage caused to side B is determined by the solution of the differential equations of GDB (formulas (1a, b, c) and (2a, b, c)). If side A wins in the first stage and the final defeat in the second, the remaining number of BSR from side B will be

For this scenario, information is recorded: “Victory of side B”; "The remainder of the BSR N ₂ = ..." or "The remainder of the BSR N ₁ = ...".

For the case of parity of forces and means of parties A and B K _p (R) = 1, the information is recorded: "Parity in the main database."

The authors' solution of various examples for groupings with different initial data (Table 1) illustrates the advantage of the proposed two-stage database strategy proposed by the authors, which is as follows.

In two-stage group actions, out of all k groups, for the initial destruction, the i-th group is selected, which is characterized by the condition

In two-stage databases, the initial destruction begins with the 1st group, if

λ ₁ µ ₁ > λ ₂ µ ₂ ,

otherwise, with

λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ ,

destruction begins with the second group.

Table 1 shows examples confirming the correctness of the strategy proposed by the authors both in the victory of side A and in defeat. Upon victory (see line 1b), side A retains 10 units of BSR, and if defeated, it inflicts maximum damage to the enemy (line 2a).

Table 1 Examples confirming the dependence of the database results on the choice of the strategy proposed by the authors No. p / p Inequalities of Intensity Products Strategy The remainder of the BSrM _∞ (t) on the side A The remainder of the BSR N ₁ (t), N ₂ (t) at side B GB result one 2 3 four 5 6 The influence of the choice of strategy on the result of the database Initial data for 1a-1c: M = 33; µ ₁ = 0.09; µ ₁ = 0.1; N ₁ = 19; λ ₁ = 0.11; N ₂ = 10; λ ₂ = 0.13 1a λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ S {A; B ₁ , B ₂ } M _∞ = 0 N ₁ (t ₂ ) = 0, N ₂ (t ₂ ) = 5 The side wins the wholesale. strategy (1b), loses with strategy (1a) 1b λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ } M _∞ = 10 → max N ₁ (t ₂ ) = 0, N ₂ (t ₂ ) = 0 1c λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ S {A; B ₁ ∪ B ₂ } M _∞ = 6 N ₁ (t ₁ ) = 0, N ₂ (t ₁ ) = 0 The influence of the choice of strategy when defeating side A on the result of the database with λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ Initial data for 2a-2c: M = 30; µ ₁ = 0.09; µ ₁ = 0.1; N ₁ = 19; λ ₁ = 0.11; N ₂ = 10; λ ₂ = 0.1 2a λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ } M _∞ (t ₂ ) = 0 N ₂ (t ₁ ) = 9, N ₁ (t ₂ ) = 0 Victory of side B. Optimal strategy (2a) reduces the remainder of the BSR of side B 2b λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ S {A; B ₁ , B ₂ } M _∞ (t ₂ ) = 0 N ₁ (t ₁ ) = 3, N ₂ (t ₁ ) = 10 2c λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ }, r ₁ = 0.5 M _∞ (t ₂ ) = 0 N ₁ (t ₁ ) = 8, N ₂ (t ₁ ) = 2

Differential equations of one-stage group databases in the absence of information about the coordinates of the BSR on both sides. The dynamics of such actions “by area” is described by the following differential equations:

The initial conditions for their solution are the quantities:

In case of victory of party A, its remainder BSr M _∞ is determined by the equation

wherein

In case of victory of party B, its remainder BSR N _∞ is expressed by the equation

where b ₁ and b _{2 are} determined from formula (7a).

The combat superiority coefficient of side A in single-stage databases is calculated according to the equation

where r ₁₂ = r ₁ / r ₂ ; µ ₁₂ = µ ₁ / µ ₂ . In case of victory of the party A K _p (R) must be more than 1, with defeat - less than one, with parity of military forces and means - equal to one.

Despite the obvious effect when choosing the optimal strategy, there are situations to limit their use. These include the following situations:

1 lack of influence of the choice of strategy on the outcome of GDB:

1.1 in the presence of intelligence and the absence of a dominant product of intensities of fire destruction (line 1, table 2), when

λ ₁ µ ₁ = λ ₂ µ ₂ ,

for any choice of strategy, the remainder of the BSr is the same and is M _∞ = 16 (see columns 9-11,12 of table 2);

1.2 in the presence of intelligence R and obvious, prevailing superiority (K _p (R) >> 1 or K _p (R) << 1) of one of the parties A or B, the choice of strategy has almost no effect (rows 3, 5, columns 9-11 , 12) on the outcome of the database (the rule works: “there is power - there is no need to choose a strategy”);

2 the effect of intelligence R on the choice of strategy in GDB:

2.1 in the presence of intelligence R about the coordinates of the BSR of the parties and regardless of the superiority factors K _p (R)> 1 (line 6 of table 2) or K _p (R) <1 (line 2a of table 1), the strategy S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ }, determined by the dominant product of the intensities of the destructive fire of the parties

;

;

всегда снижает эффективность ГБД, см. строки 1 и 2 таблицы 2;2.2 lack of intelligence

always reduces the effectiveness of GDB, see lines 1 and 2 of table 2;

приводит не только к снижению эффективности ГБД, но и к смене самой стратегии S{A; B₁∩B₂} по сравнению с наличием разведки S{A; B₂, B₁}. В этом нетрудно убедиться, сравнив строки 1 и 2, 3 и 4, столбцы 9-11, 12.2.3 lack of intelligence

leads not only to a decrease in the effectiveness of GDB, but also to a change in the strategy S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } compared with the presence of intelligence S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ }. This can be easily verified by comparing rows 1 and 2, 3 and 4, columns 9-11, 12.

2.4 the lack of intelligence even with parity of the parties still leads to the optimal strategy S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } (row 8, columns 9, 12). In the case of deviation from it, the remainder of the forces of the enemy increases significantly (row 8, columns 10, 11, 12);

2.5, unlike military operations with homogeneous groups, in which the coefficient of military confrontation K _{p is} always the same [1-4], with a database with heterogeneous ones it is different and depends on the choice of strategy, which leads to different outcomes of the database (table 2, columns 9- 12).

table 2 The influence of intelligence on the choice of strategy in the GDB Source data of BSR GDB results of the parties No. M µ ₁ µ ₂ N ₁ λ ₁ N ₂ λ ₂ S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } S {A; B ₁ , B ₂ } S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ } Note one 2 3 four 5 6 7 8 9 10 eleven 12 1p 33 0.11 0.1 19 0.1 10 0.11 M _∞ = 16 M _∞ = 16 M _∞ = 16 Indifference to s 2nd 33 0.11 0.1 19 0.1 10 0.11 M _∞ = 8 M _∞ = 10 N _∞ = 18 S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } 3p 66 0.09 0.1 19 0.11 10 0.13 M _∞ = 57 M _∞ = 57 M _∞ = 58 Indifference to s 4th 66 0.09 0.1 19 0.11 10 0.13 M _∞ = 50 M _∞ = 34 M _∞ = 31 S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } 5p 33 0.09 0.1 40 0.11 thirty 0.13 N _∞ = 63 N _∞ = 64 N _∞ = 63 Indifference to s 6p 33 0.09 0.1 19 0.11 10 0.13 M _∞ = 6 N _∞ = 5 M = 10 S {A; B ₂ , B ₁ } 7th 33 0.09 0.1 19 0.11 10 0.13 M _∞ = 1 N _∞ = 12 N _∞ = 19 S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } 8th 33 0.086 0.1 19 0.11 10 0.13 M _∞ = N _∞ = 0 N _∞ = 12 N _∞ = 20 S {A; B ₁ ∩ B ₂ } Note: In the 1st column, the letter “p” means intelligence by the parties; the letters "op" - the lack of intelligence from the parties about the coordinates of the BSR.

The device that implements the method shown in Fig. 1 contains the following blocks: switch 1, four memory blocks 2, 3, 4, 5, control unit 6, multiplication unit 7, two comparison units 8, 11, logic unit 9, three arithmetic block 10, 12, 13 and block 14 visualization, while the outputs 15, 16, 17, 18 of the switch 1 are connected to the corresponding informative inputs 15, 16, 17, 18 of the blocks 2, 3, 4, 5 of the memory connected to their outputs 19, 20, 21 with the inputs of all 19, 20, 21 arithmetic blocks 10, 12, 13 and the multiplication block 7, connected by its outputs 23, 24 with the corresponding inputs 23, 24 of the first b eye 8 comparison, connected by its outputs 25, 26, 27 with the inputs 25, 26, 27 of the first arithmetic unit and with the corresponding inputs 25, 26, 27 of block 9 of the logic, input 22 of which is connected to output 22 of memory unit 5, and output 28 the inputs 28 of all arithmetic blocks 10, 12, 13, the outputs 29, 30 of the first arithmetic block 10 are connected to the input 31 of the logic block 9 and to the inputs 29, 30 of the second comparison block 11, all outputs 32-36 of which are connected to the inputs 32-36 of the block 9 logic, the outputs 46-49 of which are connected to the inputs 46-49 of the visualization unit 14, the other inputs 37-45 of which are connected us to respective outputs 37-45 of the second and third arithmetic units 12, 13, control outputs 50 of the control unit 6 connected to the control inputs 50 of all blocks 1-14.

The operation of the device is as follows.

разведданных о координатах БСр сторон А и В, а также характеристики БСр стороны А: М, р_1А, р_2А, f_1A, f_2A и группировок В₁: N₁, p₁, f₁ и В₂: N₂, р₂, f₂ поступают на входы коммутатора 1, а затем по управляющему сигналу с блока 6 управления исходные данные БСр сторон подаются на входы 15, 16, 17, 18 блоков памяти. Значения р_1А, р_2А, f_1A, f_2A, р₁, f₁, p₂, f_2A 2 с выходов 19, 20, 21 блоков памяти в соответствии с рис.1 поступают на входы 19, 20, 21 блока 7 умножения, а с выхода 22 сигнал о наличии R или отсутствии R разведки у сторон на такой же вход 22 блока 9 логики, который своим выходом 28 включает части арифметических блоков 10, 12, 13, выходы которых зависят от наличия R информации о координатах БСр сторон К_п(R), M(R), N(R).According to Fig. 1, the initial data on the presence of R or absence

intelligence about the coordinates of the BSR of parties A and B, as well as the characteristics of the BSR of side A: M, p _1A , p _2A , f _1A , f _2A and groups B ₁ : N ₁ , p ₁ , f ₁ and B ₂ : N ₂ , p ₂ , f ₂ are fed to the inputs of the switch 1, and then, according to the control signal from the control unit 6, the initial data of the sides are supplied to the inputs 15, 16, 17, 18 of the memory blocks. The values of p _1A , p _2A , f _1A , f _2A , p ₁ , f ₁ , p ₂ , f _2A 2 from the outputs of 19, 20, 21 memory blocks in accordance with Fig. 1 go to the inputs 19, 20, 21 of block 7 multiplication, and from output 22, a signal indicating the presence of R or the absence of R intelligence from the parties to the same input 22 of logic block 9, which with its output 28 includes parts of arithmetic blocks 10, 12, 13, the outputs of which depend on the presence of R information about the coordinates of the sides K _p (R), M (R), N (R).

The values of the products λ ₁ µ ₁ , λ ₂ µ _{2 of} fire damage to side A from each of the groups B ₁ , B ₂ from the outputs 23, 24 of the multiplication unit 7 come to the inputs 23, 24 of the first comparison unit 8.

One of the comparison results: λ ₁ μ ₁ > λ ₂ μ ₂ or λ ₁ μ ₁ <λ ₂ μ ₂ or λ ₁ μ ₁ = λ ₂ μ ₂ from one of the outputs 25, 26, 27 of block 8 of the comparison goes to one of inputs 25, 26, 27 of block 9 of the logic and one of the inputs 25, 26, 27 of the first arithmetic block 10. From block 9 of the logic from one of its outputs 46, 47, 48, a signal is transmitted to the corresponding input 46, 47, 48 of block 14 renderings. On block 14 of the visualization, depending on the comparison results, the corresponding information about the rational strategy of the GDB appears:

for λ ₁ µ ₁ > λ ₂ µ ₂ - “The presence of intelligence. Strategy S (A; B ₁ , B ₂ ) ”(input 46 of block 14);

when λ ₁ µ ₁ <λ ₂ µ ₂ - “The presence of intelligence. Strategy S (A; B ₂ , B ₁ ) ”(input 47 of block 14);

when λ ₁ µ ₁ = λ ₂ µ ₂ - “The presence of intelligence. Any strategy (input 48 of block 14).

From the output 28 of the logic unit 9, the enabling signals R (the presence of intelligence on the sides A, B about the coordinates of the BSr) are received at the inputs 28 of all arithmetic units 10, 12, 13 and the input 28 of the second comparison unit 10. In the first arithmetic unit 10, the value of the military superiority coefficient is calculated according to formulas (4a), (4b), the value of which is fed to the input 31 of the visualization unit.

Also, the value of K _p (R) is fed to the input 29 of the comparison unit. The result of the comparison can be: K _p (R) >>1; K _p (R)>1; K _p (R) = 1; K _p (R) <1; K _p (R) << 1. According to the comparison results, a signal appears at one of the outputs 32-36 of block 11, which is fed to the corresponding input 32-36 of logic block 9, from one of the outputs 41-45 of which it is transmitted to one of the inputs 41-45 of visualization block 14. On block 14 of the visualization, in addition to the value of K _p (R), the combat superiority coefficient of one of the parties, depending on the comparison results, there is relevant information on predicting the results of the database:

when K _p (R) >> 1 - “The presence of intelligence. The rout of the groups B ₁ , B ₂ ) ”(input 41 of block 14);

when K _p (R)> 1 - "The presence of intelligence. Victory of side A ”(input 42 of block 14);

when K _p (R) = 1 - "The presence of intelligence. Parity in the database. (input 43 of block 14);

when K _p (R) <1 - "The presence of intelligence. Victory of side B ”(input 44 of block 14);

when K _p (R) << 1 - "The presence of intelligence. The rout of side A ”(input 45 of block 14).

For cases where K _p (R) >> 1 or K _p (R)> 1 or K _p (R) = 1, the signal from the output of the logic block 28 is fed to the input 28 of the arithmetic block 12, in which the calculation depends on according to one of the formulas (3a) or (3b) of the chosen strategy, the quantities M _∞ (A; B ₁ , B ₂ ) of the remaining BSp of side A or M _∞ (A; B ₂ , B ₁ ). The value of M _∞ (R) is supplied from the output 37 to the input 37 of the block 14 visualization.

In case of defeat of side A, when K _p <1 or K _p (R) << 1 (defeat of side A), damage to side B is determined by the signal from output 28 of logic block 9, transmitted to input 28 of arithmetic block 13, in which calculating, depending on the chosen strategy, according to formulas (5a) or (5b), the values of the remaining BSR of the side BN _∞ (A; B ₁ , B ₂ ) or N _∞ (A; B ₂ , B ₁ ). The result N _∞ (R) from the output 39 of the arithmetic unit 13 is input to the input 39 of the visualization unit 14, on which the information appears: “The remainder N _∞ (R) = ...”.

The work of the invention in the absence of coordinates about the BSR of the parties differs little from the previous description.

поступает на вход 22 блока 9 логики, один из выходов 49 которого соединен со входом 49 блока 9 визуализации, на котором высвечивается информация: «Одноэтапные ГБД, S{A; B₁∪B₂}». С выхода 28 блока 9 логики подается сигнал на входы 28 всех арифметических блоков 10, 12, 13. Осуществляется вычисление

по формуле (7в) в блоке 10, величина которого с выхода 30 (выход 29 блока 10 не работает) подается на вход 31 блока 14 визуализации. На блоке 14 происходит высвечивание значения

.Firstly, the output signal 22 of block 5 of the memory signal

arrives at input 22 of the logic unit 9, one of the outputs 49 of which is connected to the input 49 of the visualization unit 9, on which the information is displayed: “One-stage GDB, S {A; B ₁ ∪ B ₂ }. ” From the output 28 of the logic unit 9, a signal is supplied to the inputs 28 of all arithmetic units 10, 12, 13. The calculation is carried out

according to the formula (7c) in block 10, the value of which from output 30 (output 29 of block 10 does not work) is supplied to input 31 of visualization block 14. At block 14, the value is highlighted

.

с выхода 30 также подается на вход 30 второго блока 11 сравнения. Согласно результатам сравнения на одном из выходов 32-36 блока 11 появляется сигнал, который поступает на соответствующий вход 36-36 блока 9 логики, с одного из выходов 41-45 которого он передается на один из входов 41-45 блока 14 визуализации. На блоке 14 визуализации кроме значения

коэффициента боевого превосходства одной из сторон в зависимости от результатов сравнения возникает соответствующая информация о прогнозировании результатов БД:Value

output 30 is also fed to input 30 of the second block 11 comparison. According to the comparison results, a signal appears at one of the outputs 32-36 of block 11, which is fed to the corresponding input 36-36 of logic block 9, from one of the outputs 41-45 of which it is transmitted to one of the inputs 41-45 of visualization block 14. On block 14 visualization except the value

coefficient of combat superiority of one of the parties, depending on the comparison results, there is relevant information on predicting the results of the database:

- «Разведки нет. Разгром группировок B₁, B₂)» (вх.41 блока 14);at

“There is no intelligence. The rout of the groups B ₁ , B ₂ ) ”(input 41 of block 14);

- «Разведки нет. Победа стороны A» (вх.42 блока 14);at

“There is no intelligence. Victory of side A ”(input 42 of block 14);

- «Разведки нет. Паритет в БД. (вх.43 блока 14);at

“There is no intelligence. Parity in the database. (input 43 of block 14);

- «Разведки нет. Победа стороны B» (вх.44 блока 14);at

“There is no intelligence. Victory of side B ”(input 44 of block 14);

- «Разведки нет. Разгром стороны A» (вх.45 блока 14).at

“There is no intelligence. The rout of side A ”(input 45 of block 14).

или

или

, сигнал с выхода 28 блока логики подается на вход 28 арифметического блока 12, в котором происходит вычисление по формуле (7) величины

оставшихся БСр стороны А. Величина

подается с выхода 38 на вход 38 блока 14 визуализации, на котором появляется информация: «Остаток БСр

».For situations when

or

or

, the signal from the output 28 of the logic unit is fed to the input 28 of the arithmetic unit 12, in which the calculation according to the formula (7)

the remaining BSR side A. Velichina

served from the output 38 to the input 38 of the block 14 visualization, on which the information appears:

".

или

(разгром стороны А), нанесенный ущерб стороне В определяется сигналом с выхода 28 блока 9 логики, передаваемого на вход 28 арифметического блока 13, в котором происходит вычисление согласно формуле (7б) величины оставшихся БСр стороны В

. Результат

с выхода 39 арифметического блока 13 поступает на вход 39 блока 14 визуализации, на котором появляется информация: «Остаток БСр

».In case of defeat of side A, when

or

(defeat of side A), damage caused to side B is determined by the signal from the output 28 of logic block 9, transmitted to input 28 of the arithmetic block 13, in which, according to formula (7b), the values of the remaining BSR of side B are calculated

. Result

from the output 39 of the arithmetic unit 13 is fed to the input 39 of the visualization unit 14, on which the information appears: “The remainder of the BSR

".

The synchronization of the blocks is carried out using the control unit 6.

The implementation of the proposed device at the first stage is possible in the form of a hardware-software complex on a PC, and at the second - in the form of an autonomous device.

Information sources

1. Zhirov A.Yu. Military applied mathematics. The probabilistic basis for evaluating the effectiveness of combat and support actions of aviation. - Monino: VVA them. Yu.A. Gagarina, 2004.S.80-118.

2. Ivanov P.I. et al. Fundamentals and application of applied mathematics methods in military affairs. - Monino: VVA them. Yu.A. Gagarina, 1991. S.186-224.

3. Ventzel E.S. Introduction to operations research. M .: Sov. Radio, 1964, 391 p.

4. Abchuk V.A., Matveychuk F.A., Tomashevsky L.P. Equations of battle dynamics / Handbook of Operations Research. - Moscow: Military Publishing House of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR, 1979, p. 322-325.

5. Chernoscutov A.I., Klimov S.M. et al. Method and device of target distribution for group objects. The decision to grant a patent for the invention of 08.25.10, G06F 17/00, G0F 5/04, F41G 7/34, F41G 7/00.

6. Parkhomenko O.L. (RU) and others. Patent No. 2236666, F41G 7/00.

7. Danilenko A.I. (RU) and others. Patent No. 2073380, G01S 5/00.

8. Space automated system for monitoring moving objects. (RU), patent No. 2284550, G01S 13/06.

9. Belyaev B.G. (RU) and others. Patent No. 2157550, G01S 5/00.

Claims (2)

1. The way to select a target distribution strategy for group objects, namely, that the data of their military assets and means of each enemy grouping are recorded in a memory block, the data is transmitted to the inputs of all arithmetic blocks, characterized in that the presence or absence of information about the coordinates of the military assets of the parties, which enters the logic block, information on the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of all military assets is transmitted to the inputs of the multiplication block, from the output of which the product the intensity of the fire of side A against the intensity of each of the enemy’s groups is compared in the first block with the same product of the intensity of the fire of side A with another of the enemy’s groups, the results of the comparison are sent to the visualization unit, reading from which determines the strategy of warfare, the value of the confrontation criterion calculated in the first arithmetic block, compared in the second block of comparison with threshold values, the comparison results are sent to the visualization block, sc the collection of which determines the outcome of hostilities, the remnants of their military assets or enemy’s assets are calculated respectively in the second and third arithmetic unit and read from the visualization unit, in the absence of information about the coordinates of the military assets of the parties, one-stage combat operations read from the visualization unit will be rational, the value of the confrontation criterion is calculated in the first arithmetic block, compared in the second block of comparison with threshold values, the comparison results odayut visualization unit, which determines the outcome of sensing fighting residues their weapons or of the enemy is calculated respectively in the second and third arithmetic units and their readout is performed with the imaging unit. 2. The device for implementing the method according to claim 1, comprising a switch and three memory units, a control unit, two comparison units, three arithmetic units and a visualization unit, characterized in that it includes a fourth memory unit, a multiplication unit and a logic unit, the outputs of the switch are connected to the informative inputs of all memory blocks connected by all their first three outputs to the first inputs of all arithmetic blocks and to the inputs of the multiplication unit connected by their outputs to the inputs of the first comparison unit, connected its outputs with the second inputs of the first arithmetic unit, connected with its outputs to the visualization unit and to the first inputs of the second comparison unit, the outputs of which are connected to the third inputs of the logic unit, the first input of which is connected to the output of the fourth memory block, and the second is connected to the outputs of the first block comparison, the first output of the logic block is connected to the third inputs of the first arithmetic block and to the second inputs of the second comparison block and the second inputs of the second and third arithmetic blocks, the outputs of which x are connected to the inputs of the visualization block, the second and third group of outputs of the logic block are connected to the inputs of the visualization block, the control outputs of the control block are connected to the control inputs of all blocks.