skip to main content
10.1145/3371425.3371428acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaiipccConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Near space defense operation modeling and realization of multi-sensor autonomous cooperative scheduling

Published:19 December 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

In order to solve the multi-sensor dynamic cooperative scheduling problem for near space hypersonic vehicle defense, the autonomous collaborative distributed resource scheduling architecture with logical judgment ability is designed, and then the resource scheduling model which contains the detection advantage, deadline, load ration and transfer times is constructed. What's more, the improve particle swarm optimization with adaptive cellular is proposed, which base on the design of repulsion operator and cellular operator. Finally, experimental results demonstrate superiority of the model and algorithm, which can provide the method support for detecting architecture of near space defense operation.

References

  1. Fu Q, Wang G, Guo X K, et al. (2015). Requirements analysis on collaborative near space high-speed detection and tracking of targets. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 37(4), 758--762.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Mcinlyre T J, Khan R, Troy N E, et al. (2013). Visible and Near Infrared Spectroscopy of Hayahusa Reentry using Semi-autonomous Tracking. Journal of Spacecraft and rockets, 51(1), 31--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Fan C L, Fu Q and Xing Q H (2017). Cooperative tracking optimization of near space high-speed vehicle based on improved particle swarm optimization. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 39(3), 476--481.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Han Y, Gong D and Jin Y (2017). Evolutionary Multiobjective Blocking Lot-Streaming Flow Shop Scheduling with Machine Breakdowns. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Miloud B, Mohamed Y and Djamel D (2015). Distributed low-latency data aggregation scheduling in wireless sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks, 11(3), 25--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Porta T L, Petrioli C and Phillips C (2014). Sensor mission assignment in rechargeable wireless sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks, 10(4), 15--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Xiong J, Leus R, Yang Z, et al. (2016). Evolutionary Multi-objective Resource Allocation and Scheduling in the Chinese Navigation Satellite System Problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 251(2), 662--675.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Wai M Z, Xiao X H and Wei X (2017). A two-phase genetic annealing method for integrated Earth observation satellite scheduling problems. Soft Computing, (3), 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Li Z L, Li X J and Sun W (2017). Task Scheduling Model and Algorithm for Agile Satellite Considering Imaging Quality. Journal of Astronautics, 38(6), 26--33.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Zhang H W, Xie J W and Zhang Z J (2017). Task Scheduling of Phased Array Radar Based on Hybrid Adaptive Genetic Algorithm. Acta Armamentarii, 50(1), 215--234.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Sun M C, Zhang Q and Chen G L (2018). Dynamic Time Window Adaptive Scheduling Algorithm for the Phased Array Radar. Journal of Radars, 7(3), 33--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Reza M E and Wang J (2013). Scheduling mobile nodes for cooperative data transport in sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks, 21(3), 6--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Rama M R A, Lakshmi K and Krishna K S (2015). Detection of delamination in laminated composites with limited measurements combining PCA and dynamic QPSO. Advances in Engineering Software, 86, 98--105.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Wei H L (2015). Adaptive division of labor particle swarm optimization. Expert Systems with Applications, 42, 5890--5898.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Liu X (2012). Air Defense and anti-space information system and integration technology. National Defense Industry Press, 2012, 10--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Fan C L, Xing Q H, Zheng M F and Wang Y F (2015). The model of anti-TBM target allocation optimization based on fuzzy random programming. Systems Engineering- Theory& Practice, 35(9), 2401--2409.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Near space defense operation modeling and realization of multi-sensor autonomous cooperative scheduling

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      AIIPCC '19: Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Information Processing and Cloud Computing
      December 2019
      464 pages
      ISBN:9781450376334
      DOI:10.1145/3371425

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      © 2019 Association for Computing Machinery. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 19 December 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      AIIPCC '19 Paper Acceptance Rate78of211submissions,37%Overall Acceptance Rate78of211submissions,37%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)3
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader