A framework involving MEC: imaging satellites mission planning

  • Yan-jie Song
  • Zi-yu Zhou
  • Zhong-shan Zhang
  • Feng YaoEmail author
  • Ying-wu Chen
Multi-access Edge Computing Enabled Internet of Things


Satellite will play an important role in many important industries and exist as a carrier of information transmission in the era of Internet of Things. Massive data can be used in planning and scheduling processes A general data-driven framework-imaging satellite mission planning framework (ISMPF) for solving imaging mission planning problems is proposed. ISMPF mainly includes three parts: task assignment, planning and scheduling and task execution. The framework gives a general solution to the problem of satellite mission planning. The two core parts of the planning and scheduling module are machine learning algorithms and planning and scheduling algorithms, which greatly affect the quality of the results. Machine learning algorithm is mainly used to quickly obtain feasible initial solution. This idea can be used to quickly analyze and model the imaging satellite observation mission planning, imaging satellite measurement and control, data downlink mission planning problems. It has a strong generality and is suitable for most situations of imaging satellites. In order to verify the validity of ISMPF, we designed test examples for measurement and control, data downlink missions. Experimental verification demonstrates the effectiveness of our proposed framework.


Mission planning Framework Imaging satellite Mobile edge computing 



This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant numbers: 61473301, 71701203). Special thanks to Chen Wei Yan of Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications for his guidance on the mobile edge computing part. Thanks to the reviewers for their valuable comments. At the same time, I would like to thank the teachers and students for their help in the paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


  1. 1.
    Zhang ZQ, Guo JE, Wang P (2012) An AHP-based approach for evaluating mission planning efficiency of imaging satellites. Radio Eng 1:013Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gabrel V (2006) Strengthened 0-1 linear formulation for the daily satellite mission planning. J Comb Optim 11(3):341–346MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cui K, Xiang J, Zhang Y (2017) Mission planning optimization of video satellite for ground multi-object staring imaging. Adv Space Res 61(6):1476–1489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zheng Z, Guo J, Gill E (2018) Onboard autonomous mission re-planning for multi-satellite system. Acta Astronaut 145:28–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tipaldi M, Glielmo L (2017) A survey on model-based mission planning and execution for autonomous spacecraft. IEEE Syst J PP(99):1–13Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen XQ, Yu J (2017) Optimal mission planning of geo on-orbit refueling in mixed strategy. Acta Astronaut 133:63–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zheng Z, Guo J, Gill E (2017) Swarm satellite mission scheduling & planning using hybrid dynamic mutation genetic algorithm. Acta Astronaut 137:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Song YJ, Ma X, Zhang ZS, Xing LN, Chen YW (2018) A hybrid dynamic population genetic algorithm for multi-satellite and multi-station mission planning system. In: Qiao J et al (eds) Bio-inspired computing: theories and applications. BIC-TA 2018. Communications in computer and information science, vol 951. Springer, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    He Y, He L, Wang Y, Xiao Y, Chen Y, Xing L (2016) Autonomous mission replanning method for imaging satellites considering real-time weather conditions. J Comput Theor Nanosci 13(10):6967–6973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang H, Li X, Liu Y, Zhou B (2010) Summary of intelligent algorithms in planning & scheduling of Earth observation satellite. In: IEEE International conference on intelligent computing and intelligent systems, vol 3. IEEE, pp 480–483Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wei J (2013) The mission planning model and improved Ant Colony solving algorithm for networking SAR satellites. In: International conference on management science and engineering, vol 51. IEEE, pp 14–19Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ran CX, Wang HL, Xiong GY, Qiu DS (2010) Research on mission-planning of ocean moving targets imaging reconnaissance based on improved genetic algorithm. J Astronaut 2:025Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kolici V, Herrero X, Xhafa F, Barolli L (2013) Local search and genetic algorithms for satellite scheduling problems. In: Eighth international conference on broadband and wireless computing, communication and applications, vol 28. IEEE, pp 328–335Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pemberton JC, Galiber FI (2000). A constraint-based approach to satellite scheduling. In: DIMACS workshop on constraint programming and large scale discrete optimization. American Mathematical Society, pp 101–114Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xiong J, Leus R, Yang Z, Abbass HA (2016) Evolutionary multi-objective resource allocation and scheduling in the chinese navigation satellite system project. Eur J Oper Res 251(2):662–675MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mao Y, You C, Zhang J, Huang K, Letaief KB (2017) A survey on mobile edge computing: the communication perspective. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 19(4):2322–2358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mao Y, Zhang J, Letaief KB (2017) Joint task offloading scheduling and transmit power allocation for mobile-edge computing systems. In: Wireless communications & networking conference. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tianze L, Muqing W, Min Z, Wenxing L (2017) An overhead-optimizing task scheduling strategy for ad-hoc based mobile edge computing. IEEE Access 5:5609–5622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang F, Xu J, Wang X, Cui S (2017) Joint offloading and computing optimization in wireless powered mobile-edge computing systems. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun PP(99):1Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang X, Chen Z, Li K, Sun Y, Liu N, Xie W et al (2018) Communication-constrained mobile edge computing systems for wireless virtual reality: scheduling and tradeoff. IEEE Access 6:16665–16677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taleb T, Dutta S, Ksentini A, Iqbal M, Flinck H (2017) Mobile edge computing potential in making cities smarter. IEEE Commun Mag 55(3):38–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jeong S, Simeone O, Kang J (2016) Mobile edge computing via a UAV-mounted cloudlet: optimization of bit allocation and path planning. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 67(3):2049–2063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang K, Mao Y, Leng S, Zhao Q, Li L, Peng X et al (2017) Energy-efficient offloading for mobile edge computing in 5g heterogeneous networks. IEEE Access 4(99):5896–5907Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    García-Pintado J, Neal JC, Mason DC, Dance SL, Bates PD (2013) Scheduling satellite-based SAR acquisition for sequential assimilation of water level observations into flood modelling. J Hydrol 495(2):252–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Feng P, Chen H, Peng S, Chen L (2015) A method of distributed multi-satellite mission scheduling based on improved contract net protocol. In: International conference on natural computation. IEEE, pp 1062–1068Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Song Y, Huang D, Zhou Z, Chen Y (2018) An emergency task autonomous planning method of agile imaging satellite. EURASIP J Image Video Process 2018(1):29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Song Y, Song B, Zhang Z, Chen Y (2018) The satellite downlink replanning problem: a BP neural network and hybrid algorithm approach for IoT Internet connection. IEEE Access 6:39797–39806. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sun B, Wang W, Xie X, Qin Q (2010) Satellite mission scheduling based on genetic algorithm. Kybernetes 39(8):1255–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brandimarte P (2013) Scheduling satellite launch missions: an milp approach. J Sched 16(1):29–45MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sun J, Sun J, Barolli A, Biberaj A, Barolli L (2012) Genetic algorithms for satellite scheduling problems. Mob Inf Syst 8(4):351–377Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tangpattanakul P, Jozefowiez N, Lopez P (2015) A multi-objective local search heuristic for scheduling earth observations taken by an agile satellite. Eur J Oper Res 245(2):542–554MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang XW, Chen Z, Han C (2016) Scheduling for single agile satellite, redundant targets problem using complex networks theory. Chaos Solitons Fractals 83:125–132MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jung-Hyun L, Wang SM, Chung D, Hee KK (2012) Multi-satellite control system architecture and mission scheduling optimization. In: Aerospace conference, vol 186. IEEE, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Marinelli F, Nocella S, Rossi F, Smriglio S (2011) A lagrangian heuristic for satellite range scheduling with resource constraints. Comput Oper Res 38(11):1572–1583MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baek SW, Han SM, Cho KR, Lee DW, Yang JS, Bainum PM et al (2011) Development of a scheduling algorithm and gui for autonomous satellite missions. Acta Astronaut 68(7):1396–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zufferey N, Amstutz P, Giaccari P (2008) Graph colouring approaches for a satellite range scheduling problem. J Sched 11(4):263–277MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Song B, Yao F, Chen Y, Chen Y, Chen Y (2018) A hybrid genetic algorithm for satellite image downlink scheduling problem. Discrete Dyn Nat Soc. MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yan-jie Song
    • 1
  • Zi-yu Zhou
    • 2
  • Zhong-shan Zhang
    • 1
  • Feng Yao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ying-wu Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Systems EngineeringNational University of Defense TechnologyChangshaChina
  2. 2.Department of Industrial and Enterprise Systems EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations