A hybrid method for evaluating the effectiveness of giant systems with indicator correlations: an application for naval formation decision making in multiple scenarios
- 18 Downloads
This article discusses the giant system effectiveness evaluation (GSEE) problem with inevitable correlation in indicator systems due to their high specificity and complexity and proposes a hybrid method that is then applied to the naval formation decision-making process in multiple scenarios. The indicator correlation in a large-scale system will generate bias in its evaluation of effectiveness; the proposal that the lower the correlation is, the better the performance of the evidential reasoning approach (ERA) has been proven mathematically. In light of this proposition, a corollary was put forward: Fewer indicators would improve the precision of the result of the ERA application when considering the correlation. Considering that the giant system can be split into respective subsystems, which can then be analyzed by experts in their own fields, a hybrid method was developed for the GSEE problem based on the ERA and prospect theory. The core of the method is the construction of a nonlinear optimization model (NOM) aimed at minimizing the correlation and maximizing the evaluation ability of the prospect value of the indicator system. By constraint, the NOM also includes the optimized weight value of each indicator. For demonstration purposes, a naval formation operation effectiveness evaluation (NFOEE) was performed to assess the feasibility of the proposed method and the NOM. The results show that the proposed method can solve the NFOEE effectively and allow the decision maker to obtain useful information for naval formation-type decisions in multiple scenarios. Furthermore, the evaluation method is a general tool that can be applied to other GSEE problems.
KeywordsGiant system Effectiveness evaluation Indicator correlation Naval formation Evidential reasoning approach Prospect theory
The authors are very grateful to the anonymous reviewers and editor for their very valuable comments and suggestions, which were greatly helpful in revising the manuscript. This work is supported by National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFC0805309) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Logistics Research Institute, Dalian Maritime University Grant No. 3132019303).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
- Chen X, Jing Y, Li C, Jiang N (2010) Effectiveness evaluation of warfare command systems with dissymmetrical warfare information. In: IEEE American control conference, pp 5556–5560Google Scholar
- Cho V (2007) A study of the impact of organizational learning on information system effectiveness. Int J Bus Inf 2(1):127–158Google Scholar
- Huang YY, Wang JY, Wang J, Dai YW (2009) An evaluation method of operational effectiveness for the emergency plans. In: IEEE informs international conference on service operations, logistics and informatics, pp 169–172Google Scholar
- Huo JH, Zhang GH, Cai HL, Yuan L (2011) Research on an quantitative method for C^(4)ISR system effectiveness evaluation. Int Conf Intell Hum Mach Syst Cybern IEEE Comput Soc 2:23–26Google Scholar
- Kanada N, Morioka K, Sumiya Y, Yonemoto N, Shioji M, Kohmura A et al (2014) Evaluation by scale model experiments for aeronautical MIMO systems effectiveness of channel capacity evaluation in 5.1GHz band. In: IEEE antenna technology, pp 246–249Google Scholar
- Li J, Fu C, Chen Y, Yang K, Zhang X (2014) An operational efficiency evaluation method for weapon system-of-systems combat networks based on operation loop. In: IEEE international conference on system of systems engineering, pp 219–223Google Scholar
- Liberatore MJ (1982) Book review of the analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation by Thomas L. Saaty. Am J Math Manag Sci 2(2):165–172Google Scholar
- Liu SL, Li H (2017) Modified ADC method and its application for weapon system effectiveness evaluation. J Natl Univ Def Technol 39(3):130–135Google Scholar
- Liu Y, Meng M, Zhang H, Yao J (2014) Effectiveness evaluation method of naval ship oriented to multi-mission base on MAS and FS. J Harbin Inst Technol 46(2):121–128Google Scholar
- Wu QB, Ye FC, Wan XJ (2010) Study on measures of effectiveness of weapon system. Electron Prod Reliab Environ Test 28(4):27–31Google Scholar
- Yanyan H (2009) A methodology of simulation and evaluation on the operational effectiveness of weapon equipment. IEEE, Guilin, China, pp 131–136Google Scholar
- Yu J, Dai R (1993) A new discipline of science: the study of open complex giant system and its methodology. J Syst Eng Electron 4(2):2–12Google Scholar