RU2649849C1 - Method of information processing to improve effectiveness of combat with all-arms forces - Google Patents

Abstract

FIELD: computer engineering.

SUBSTANCE: invention relates to digital computer technology, namely, to digital computing systems for processing input information about the characteristics of the diversity of military equipment. Method for processing information to engage in combat with all-arms forces involves recording the initial data on the indigenous combat tools and the combat tools of each enemy group, then the data is supplemented with information on the types of the combat assets of the parties to the combat, the dynamics of combat operations is simulated, taking into account the completeness of information about the types of combat tools of the parties and the chosen strategy, remaining indigenous combat assets and remaining combat assets of the enemy are calculated and the resulting information is sent to the display unit, where it is used to predict the possible outcome of a combat.

EFFECT: increased effectiveness of the use of combat tools is achieved.

1 cl, 1 tbl

Description

The invention relates to digital computing, in particular to digital computing systems for processing input information to assess the effectiveness of the use of heterogeneous military equipment, its transformation, choosing a rational strategy, evaluating the results of combat confrontation (victory, defeat, parity), with the determination of its losses and the inflicted to the adversary of the damage in case of the different types of military equipment (BSR) of the warring factions, it can be used by the command staff of the Armed Forces in the process of training it I and retraining, conducting command and staff exercises and directly for planning group military operations (GDB).

The technical result of the application is to increase the efficiency and processing of additional information to select a rational strategy in combat operations (DB) of heterogeneous groups in order to achieve the maximum result of their application.

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 against heterogeneous groups with an assessment of its effectiveness is not known. In the sources cited, firstly, they do not consider databases against a party consisting of groups that include dissimilar combat weapons (BFs) with different characteristics, so the choice of the correct strategy for group databases cannot be made. Secondly, the price of the victory achieved is not determined and there is no quantitative assessment of one's own losses. The third drawback in the conduct of the battle is the existing shift of emphasis towards the ratio of the number of BSS of the parties, rather than the ratio of the effectiveness of the use of the combat capabilities of these funds, which leads to a decrease in the overall combat effectiveness and even to the defeat of side A with GDB.

A known method [5] that eliminates these shortcomings, which fully takes into account the specifics and evaluates the effectiveness of conducting GDB i-x groups indicator as a product of the intensities of the fire exposure of i-x groups

It has been proved [5] that in group actions from all k groups for the initial destruction i-e groups are selected, which have the condition

In two-stage databases, the initial destruction begins with the 1st group, if there is an inequality

λ ₁ μ ₁ > λ ₂ μ ₂ ,

otherwise, for λ ₁ μ ₁ <λ ₂ μ _2, annihilation begins with the 2nd grouping.

The question arises: can the effectiveness of the use of military means, in addition to heterogeneity, be influenced by other factors related to:

1) "variability" due to different projectile charge power, different BSR caliber, enemy density BSR concentration?

2) at the same time taking into account heterogeneity (intensities of the damaging effects of BSR fire and their different sizes) for a rational strategy in the database?

3) a mnemonic rule, such as formula (1), to choose a rational strategy that takes into account both factors of heterogeneity without resorting to complex formulaic dependencies?

There are patents [6-10] for solving other problems in the database of heterogeneous groups and [11-14] 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 that would eliminate the noted drawbacks.

1. According to the invention, a technical result aimed at improving the effectiveness of military operations with heterogeneous groups, including the use of the source data (characteristics) of their military assets and means of each enemy grouping, their memorization, characterized in that they additionally take into account information about the factor of "different sizes" of military equipment parties, simulate the dynamics of hostilities, taking into account additional information about the "different calibrations" of the sides and the chosen strategy, calculate the remnants of their combat COROLLARY and means of the enemy and send used and calculated information on the display unit, on which the judge about the possible results of the ongoing battle.

2. The method according to p. 1, providing for the priority strike on the ith grouping of the enemy, due to the criterion of rational choice of strategy by party A, due to the maximum value of the product

в котором

wherein

μ _0i , λ _i - the intensity of the fire, respectively, of side A according to the ith grouping of the enemy and the opposing group B _i according to the military equipment of side A;

k _0i , k _i - additional to single (in case of a point of defeat) quantities of simultaneously destroyed military equipment, due to the increased power of one combat charge of the projectile, increased caliber of the BSR, the crowded means of the parties destroyed by the military equipment of side A and the reciprocal group B _i , respectively.

The essence of the method is as follows. In bilateral databases with heterogeneous groupings, the 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 ƒ _1A , μ ₂ = p _2A ƒ _2A are the intensities of the firing fire (IPO) of the Bsr, proportional to the probabilities of hitting targets with one shot p _1A , p _2A and the rate of fire of the Bsr ƒ _1A , ляемые _2A carried out by side A on the Bsr of groups B ₁ and 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 ƒ ₁ , n ₁ (t) and N ₂ , λ ₂ = p ₂ ƒ ₂ , n ₂ (t) of maintaining the database on the base side of side A.

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

a) the strategy S _{0 of} one-stage group actions (OGD), when party A chooses an optimal relative number r ₁ such that, according to the grouping B _{1, the} databases are carried out with the part r ₁ m (t) of their BSr, and according to the grouping B _{2, the} other part is carried out with the other part r ₂ m (t), where r ₁ + r ₂ = 1. GDB are carried out until the complete destruction of both groups (victory);

b) a two-stage GDB strategy, in which side A at the first stage, choosing strategy S ₁₂ , begins to destroy by all means the BSR of group B ₁ (r ₁ = 1) or another strategy S ₂₁ , when the destruction begins with group B ₂ (r ₂ = 1), and the DB leads by all means until it is completely destroyed, in the second stage, the remaining grouping of weapons destroys another group of B ₂ (r ₂ = 1) or B ₁ (r ₁ = 1).

The rational maintenance of GDB leads not only to victory over the enemy, but also to minimize their losses. The irrational choice of a strategy by party A leads not only to its defeat, but also to the minimal destruction of the BSR of side B.

Differential equations of GDB taking into account the different sizes. For strategy S _0, databases are simultaneously maintained with groups B ₁ B ₂ . Imagine the differential equations for changing the number of BSRs in the presence of information from the parties about the coordinates of the BSR in the following form:

In the formulas (1a) - (1g) are introduced:

k ₀₁ , k ₀₂ , - the average number of destroyed in the groups B ₁ , B ₂ additional enemy infantry fighting systems with one weapon in one shot by side A;

k ₁ , k ₂ , is the average number of destroyed additional enemy BSS with one weapon in one shot by the groups of B ₁ B ₂ .

To move from strategy S ₀ to strategy S ₁₂ in the database in formulas (1a) - (1d), it is necessary at the first stage to replace n ₂ (t) with N ₂ and set r ₁ = 1. At the second stage, when side A wins, one should put n ₁ (t _∞ ) = 0, r ₁ = 0.

To move from strategy S ₀ to strategy S ₂₁ in the database in formulas (1a) - (1d), it is necessary at the first stage to replace n ₁ (t) with N ₁ and set r ₁ = 0. At the second stage, when side A wins, one should put n ₂ (t _∞ ) = 0, r ₁ = 1.

The difference between formulas (1a) - (1g) from formulas (1a), (1b) given in the prototype [5] is the presence of additional heterogeneity factors k ₀₁ , k ₀₂ , k ₁ , k ₂ , the essence of which is described in [3 , p. 193].

Table 1 shows the results of computational modeling of the database of side A with homogeneous and heterogeneous groups B ₁ , B ₂ for various situations.

Situation 1. The groups are homogeneous with respect to the JOB μ ₁ = λ ₁ = μ ₂ = λ ₂ = 0.13 and heterogeneous according to the factor of different sizes k ₀₁ = k ₁ = 0.5> k ₀₂ = k ₂ = 0.3. before the beginning of the database (t = 0), when

m (t = 0) / M = n ₁ (t = 0) / N ₁ = n ₂ (t = 0) / N ₂ = 1 and μ ₁ = λ ₁ = μ ₂ = λ ₂ = 0.13. Carrying out operations similar to [5], we obtain a criterion for maximizing the results of the database for side A, similar to formula (1)

From the above formula (2), by analogy with the formula (1), a similar conclusion follows on taking into account the heterogeneity factor of the “heterogeneity” type: in order to obtain an additional positive effect in the database with heterogeneous ones for the initial destruction of the BSr, the ith group is selected, which is inherent to condition (2 )

In two-stage databases, the initial destruction begins with the 1st group, if there is an inequality

otherwise, if (1 + k ₀₁ ) * (1 + k ₁ ) <(1 + k ₀₂ ) * (1 + k ₂ ), the destruction starts from the 2nd group.

In relation to the initial data of the table. 1 (see lines 2-4, Art. 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11) and the implementation of equation (2a)

we obtain the following inequalities in the remnants of the BSR (see Articles 12, 13) after the victory of side A

M _∞ (S ₁₂ ) = 32> M _∞ (S ₀ ) = 31> M _∞ (S ₀ ) = 27.

The preference of strategies for the effectiveness of the database for side A is as follows:

S ₁₂ > S ₀ > S ₂₁ .

Situation 2. We will change the first situation by including heterogeneity not only in terms of “diversity”, but also in terms of the factor estimated by the product of the intensities of the fire exposure of the Job (p. 5-7, p. 10, 11). Formula (2a) for this case will take the form

In relation to the initial data of the table. 1 (see lines 5-7, Art. 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11) and the specification of formula (3a)

we obtain the following inequalities in the remnants of the BSR (see Articles 12, 13) after the victory of side A

M _∞ (S ₁₂ ) = 41> M _∞ (S ₂₁ ) = 30> M _∞ (S ₀ ) = 29.

The preference of strategies for the effectiveness of the database for side A is as follows:

S ₁₂ > S ₂₁ > S ₀ .

Situation 3. We will change the second situation by reducing the initial number of side A BDS from 60 units to 50 in conditions of either their shortage or lack of delivery time. Columns 12, 13 of the table. 1 show that only the only correct strategy S ₁₂ ensures victory for side A with the result M _∞ = 18.

Situation 4. Under the conditions of uniformity of the BFR in terms of JOB, μ ₁ = λ ₁ = μ ₂ = λ ₂ = 0.13 and their equality M = N ₁ + N ₂ = 50, only taking into account the heterogeneity of at least one enemy grouping, for example, B ₁ , leads to victory for side A in all strategies compared to situation 3. However, the rational strategy is still S ₁₂ , because M _∞ (S ₁₂ ) = 20> M _∞ (S ₀ ) = 18> M _∞ (S ₂₁ ) = 11.

So, the presence of the 3rd factor of heterogeneity (along with the heterogeneity of the BSR in terms of the intensity of the fire (JOB) and the incomplete provision of the parties with reconnaissance about the coordinates of the BSR of the opposing sides, application No. 2015141256/20), due to the different projectile warhead charge, the different caliber of the BSR’s barrels, as well as the different concentration of the BSR of the parties, called, for brevity, the authors of "diverse" causes an urgent need to take it into account, due to:

1) the uniformity in the form of criteria (1) and (2) of primary destruction, group B _i , which can cause either side A the greatest damage, or which side A can cause the greatest damage (table 1, p. 2-4, Art. 12, 13) in accordance with inequality (2b), since strategy S ₁₂ provides for the destruction of group B ₁ at the first stage and B ₂ at the second;

2) a significant increase in the effect of the application of the rational strategy S ₁₂ with the simultaneous imposition of two factors of heterogeneity, dependent on the JOB and on the “diversity” (pp. 5-7, Art. 12, 13). Compared to the first situation, the remainder of the BSR of side A increased from M _∞ (S ₁₂ ) = 32 to M _∞ (S ₁₂ ) = 41 in the second situation;

3) the only way the enemy can be defeated by side A when its number is reduced from 60 to 50 (situation 3). Any deviation from the rational strategy of S ₁₂ leads side A to failure (tab. 1, p. 8, 9, 10, art. 12, 13);

4) the situation of the uniformity of the BSR in the ROW μ ₁ = λ ₁ = μ ₂ = λ ₂ = 0.13 and their equality M = N ₁ + N ₂ = 50 among the parties, only taking into account the heterogeneity of at least one enemy grouping, for example, B ₁ , leads to the victory of side A in all strategies compared to situation 3. However, the rational strategy is still S ₁₂ , because M _∞ (S ₁₂ ) = 20> M _∞ (S ₀ ) = 18> M _∞ (S ₂₁ ) = 11.

It should be noted the positive technical result of using the proposed approach in combat operations due to the fact that the effect is achieved not by attracting additional BSRs or by developing new ones, but by taking into account the combat characteristics of grouping means when choosing a rational strategy for their use.

Implementation of the proposed method at the first stage is possible in the form of a hardware-software complex on a personal computer or in military-industrial control systems, and at the second - as an autonomous device.

Information sources

1. Zhirov A.Yu. Military applied mathematics. The probabilistic basis for evaluating the effectiveness of combat and supporting aviation operations. - 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 .: Owls. Radio, 1964, 391 p.

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

5. Chernoscutov A.I. et al. Method and device of target distribution for group objects. Patent No. 2419140, G06F 17/00, G01S 5/04, F41G 7/00, F41G 7/34.

6. Chernoscutov A.I. et al. Method and device for choosing a target distribution strategy for group objects. Patent No. 2469386, G06F 17/00.

7. Chernoscutov A.I. and others. A method and device for choosing a strategy in the fighting of diverse groups. Patent No. 2467382.

8. Chernoscutov A.I. and others. A method and apparatus for assessing the impact of the delay in entering the reserve in the fighting of heterogeneous groups. Patent No. 2496084, G06F 17/00.

9. Chernoscutov A.I. et al. Method and device for evaluating the effect of false military assets in the fighting of heterogeneous groups. Patent No. 2547637.

10. Chernoskutov A.I., Sprengel A.V., Sitkevich A.V. Method and device for processing information for choosing a rational strategy in the fighting of diverse groups. Application No. 2015141256, which decided to grant a patent.

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

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

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

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

Claims (5)

1. A method of processing information aimed at improving the effectiveness of military operations with heterogeneous groups, including the use of the initial characteristics of their military assets and the means of each enemy grouping, memorizing them, characterized in that they additionally take into account information about the factor of "different sizes" of military means of the parties, simulate the dynamics combat operations, taking into account the completeness of information about the "diversity" of the military assets of the parties and the chosen strategy, calculate the balances of their military assets and means ivnika and guide used and calculated information on the display unit, on which the judge about the possible results of the ongoing battle. 2. The method according to p. 1, providing for the priority strike on the ith grouping of the enemy, due to the criterion of rational choice of strategy by party A, due to the maximum value of the product

, wherein μ _0i , λ _i - fire intensity, respectively, of side A according to the ith grouping of the enemy and the opposing group B _i according to the military equipment of side A; k _0i , k _i - additional to the aiming amount of destroyed combat equipment of the rivals, due to the increased power of the warhead of the projectile, increased caliber of the combat equipment, their crowding, destroyed respectively by the military equipment of side A and the response group B _i .