基于区间直觉模糊数ANP的体系贡献率计算方法

doi:10.16182/j.issn1004731x.joss.21-0597

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

体系贡献率主要用于体系建设中度量装备对体系的贡献程度。为解决目前体系贡献率计算存在的一些问题，提出一种“任务-能力-指标-装备”的多层次装备指标体系结构。考虑了装备指标体系结构、网络分析法和区间直觉模糊数的特点，提出了一种基于区间直觉模糊数的网络分析法以得到更准确的体系贡献率。实验表明，该方法不仅能够解决体系贡献率计算公式现存的问题，而且与AHP(analytic hierarchy process)和ANP(analytic network process)相比，可以得到更准确的体系贡献率，为体系建设提供更有效的支持。

关键词: 体系, 体系贡献率, 区间直觉模糊数, 网络分析法, 计算方法

Abstract:

Contribution rate to system-of-systems (CRSoS) is mainly used to measure the contribution of an equipment to system of systems (SoS) in system construction. In order to solve some problems in the calculation of CRSoS, a multi-level equipment indicator architecture of "task-ability-indicator- equipment" is proposed. At the same time, considering the characteristics of the equipment indicator architecture, ANP (analytic network process) and IVIFN (interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy number), a IVIF-ANP calculation method is proposed to obtain more accurate CRSoS. Experiments show that this method can not only solve the problem of the calculation formula of CRSoS, but also obtain more accurate CRSoS compared with analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and analytic network process (ANP), which provides more effective support for system construction.

Key words: system of systems (SoS), contribution rate to system-of-systems, interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy number (IVIFN), analytic network process (ANP), calculation method

中图分类号:

TP391.9

丁泽坚, 孙松涛, 何志文, 刘飞. 基于区间直觉模糊数ANP的体系贡献率计算方法[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2022, 34(11): 2386-2395.

Zejian Ding, Songtao Sun, Zhiwen He, Fei Liu. Contribution Rate Calculation Method to System-of-Systems Based on Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Number ANP[J]. Journal of System Simulation, 2022, 34(11): 2386-2395.

图/表 9

图1

图2

图3

表1

表2

表3

图4

表4

表5

参考文献 21

[1]	殷小静, 胡晓峰, 荣明, 等. 体系贡献率评估方法研究综述与展望[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2019, 31(6): 1027-1038.
	Yin Xiaojing, Hu Xiaofeng, Rong Ming, et al. Review of Evaluation Methods of Contribution Rate to System of Systems[J]. Journal of System Simulation, 2019, 31(6): 1027-1038.
[2]	陈立新. 一种通用的装备体系贡献率评估框架[J]. 军事运筹与系统工程, 2020, 34(2): 33-38.
	Chen Lixin. A General Equipment System Contribution Rate Evaluation Framework[J]. Military Operations Research and Systems Engineering, 2020, 34(2): 33-38.
[3]	和钰. 基于RIMER方法的反导武器装备体系作战能力贡献率研究[D]. 长沙: 国防科技大学, 2016: 107.
	He Yu. Research on Capability Contribution of Anti-missile Weapon Systems Based on RIMER[D]. Changsha: National University of Defense Technology, 2016: 107.
[4]	赵丹玲, 谭跃进, 李际超, 等. 基于作战环的武器装备体系贡献度评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2017, 39(10): 2239-2247.
	Zhao Danling, Tan Yuejin, Li Jichao, et al. Armament System of Systems Contribution Evaluation Based on Operation Loop[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2017, 39(10): 2239-2247.
[5]	娄本超. 基于层次分析法的直升机体系贡献率评估方法[J]. 直升机技术, 2020(1): 6-10.
	Lou Benchao. Helicopter System Contribution Rate Evaluation Method Based on AHP[J]. Helicopter Technology, 2020(1): 6-10.
[6]	陈立新. 关于装备体系贡献率研究的几点思考[J]. 军事运筹与系统工程, 2018, 32(3): 37-43.
	Chen Lixin. Some Thoughts on the Contribution to Equipment System-of-Systems[J]. Military Operations Research and Systems Engineering, 2018, 32(3): 37-43.
[7]	彭耿, 周少平, 张绪明, 等. 武器装备体系贡献率计算方法[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2019, 44(4): 33-36.
	Peng Geng, Zhou Shaoping, Zhang Xuming, et al. Contribution Rate Calculation of Weapon System[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2019, 44(4): 33-36.
[8]	叶紫晴, 屈也频. 基于规则推理的海军航空作战装备体系贡献度分析[J]. 指挥控制与仿真, 2015, 37(5): 29-33.
	Ye Ziqing, Qu Yepin. Analysis of Contribution Degree Based on Rule-Based Reasoning for Naval Aviation Operation Equipment System[J]. Command Control & Simulation, 2015, 37(5): 29-33.
[9]	舒宇. 基于能力需求的武器装备体系结构建模方法与应用研究[D]. 长沙: 国防科技大学, 2009: 163.
	Shu Yu. Research on the Method and Application of the Architecture Modeling of Weapon System-of-Systems Based on Capability Requirement[D]. Changsha: National University of Defense Technology, 2009: 163.
[10]	Atanassov K, Gargov G. Interval Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets[J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems (S0165-0114), 1989, 31: 343-349.
[11]	Bustince H, Burillo P. Correlation of Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets[J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems (S0165-0114), 1995, 74(2): 237-244.
[12]	Xu Z, Chen J. Approach to Group Decision Making Based on Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Judgment Matrices[J]. Systems Engineering - Theory & Practice (S1874-8651), 2007, 27(4): 126-133.
[13]	Zhuang H. Additively Consistent Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relations and Their Application to Group Decision Making[J]. Information (S2078-2489), 2018, 9(10): 260.
[14]	Wan S, Dong J. Additive Consistent Interval-Valued Atanassov Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relation and Likelihood Comparison Algorithm Based Group Decision Making[J]. European Journal of Operational Research (S0377-2217), 2017, 263(2): 571-582.
[15]	Yang Y, Li H, Zhang Z, et al. Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Analytic Network Process[J]. Information Sciences (S0020-0255), 2020, 526: 102-118.
[16]	Xu Z, Chen J. Some Models for Deriving the Priority Weights from Interval Fuzzy Preference Relations[J]. European Journal of Operational Research (S0377-2217), 2008, 184(1): 266-280.
[17]	Liao H, Mi X, Xu Z, et al. Intuitionistic Fuzzy Analytic Network Process[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems (S1063-6706), 2018, 26(5): 2578-2590.
[18]	Mikhailov L, Singh M G. Fuzzy Analytic Network Process and Its Application to the Development of Decision Support Systems[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) (S1094-6977), 2003, 33(1): 33-41.
[19]	Mikhailov L, Singh M G. Fuzzy Assessment of Priorities with Application to Competitive Bidding[J]. Journal of Decision Systems (S1246-0125), 1999, 8(1): 11-28.
[20]	徐泽水, 达庆利. 一种基于可能度的区间判断矩阵排序法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2003, 11(1): 63-65.
	Xu Zeshui, Da Qingli. An Interval Judgment Matrix Ranking Method Based on Possibility Degree[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2003, 11(1): 63-65.
[21]	Saaty T L. Fundamentals of the Analytic Network Process-Multiple Networks with Benefits, Costs, Opportunities and Risks[J]. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering (S1004-3756), 2004, 13(3): 129-151.

指标	依赖关系
探测识别能力I₁	无
导航能力I₂	无
通信能力I₃	无
指挥决策能力I₄	I₁, I₂, I₃, I₄, I₅, I₆, I₇, I₈, I₉, I₁₀, I₁₁, I₁₂
态势融合能力I₅	I₁, I₂, I₃, I₄, I₅, I₆, I₇, I₈, I₉, I₁₀, I₁₁, I₁₂
行动控制能力I₆	I₁, I₂, I₃, I₄, I₅, I₆, I₇, I₈, I₉, I₁₀
机动能力I₇	无
投送能力I₈	无
生存能力I₉	I₁, I₂, I₃, I₄, I₅, I₆ , I₇, I₈, I₉, I₁₀, I₁₁, I₁₂
自卫能力I₁₀	I₄, I₅, I₆, I₉, I₁₀, I₁₁
环境适应能力I₁₁	I₁, I₂, I₃, I₄, I₅, I₆, I₇, I₈, I₉, I₁₀
快速修复能力I₁₂	I₉, I₁₀

指标	文献[5]	“1-9”标度	IVIF标度
环境适应能力I₁₁	0.580 0	0.500 0	0.583 3
快速修复能力I₁₂	0.420 0	0.500 0	0.416 7

指标	文献[5]	传统的ANP	IVIF-ANP
探测识别能力I₁	0.044 1	0.011 2	0.039 4
导航能力I₂	0.086 1	0.093 5	0.082 7
通信能力I₃	0.079 8	0.064 8	0.068 1
指挥决策能力I₄	0.014 0	0.029 5	0.013 6
态势融合能力I₅	0.040 6	0.046 8	0.050 4
行动控制能力I₆	0.015 4	0.037 1	0.030 7
机动能力I₇	0.235 2	0.178 4	0.162 1
投送能力I₈	0.254 8	0.231 5	0.189 7
生存能力I₉	0.075 6	0.133 3	0.135 6
自卫能力I₁₀	0.044 4	0.066 7	0.086 3
环境适应能力I₁₁	0.063 8	0.081 6	0.113 6
快速修复能力I₁₂	0.046 2	0.025 6	0.027 8

指标	直升机A	直升机B
探测识别能力I₁	0.960 0	0.820 0
导航能力I₂	0.990 0	0.930 0
通信能力I₃	0.980 0	0.910 0
指挥决策能力I₄	0.730 0	0.660 0
态势融合能力I₅	0.764 0	0.598 7
行动控制能力I₆	0.760 0	0.680 0
机动能力I₇	0.639 0	0.291 0
投送能力I₈	0.873 3	0.471 3
生存能力I₉	0.880 0	0.770 0
自卫能力I₁₀	0.830 0	0.820 0
环境适应能力I₁₁	0.900 0	0.900 0
快速修复能力I₁₂	0.960 0	0.930 0

体系效能或体系贡献率	文献[5]	传统的ANP	IVIF-ANP
A的体系效能	0.836 7	0.839 2	0.847 3
B的体系效能	0.616 4	0.643 5	0.671 1
A的体系贡献率/%	35.7	30.4	26.3