Journals Articles Conferences News About CLP
Submit a paper Email Alert
Search
Search
Articles
Journals
News
Advanced Search
Top Searches
2D MaterialsTransformation opticsQuantum PhotonicsSmall lasersSemiconductor UV PhotonicsSupersymmetric microring laser arrays

Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, Volume. 58, Issue 16, 1628001(2021)

Threat Assessment Method for UAV Based on a Bayesian Network with a Small Dataset

Ye Li1, Zhigang Lü1,2, Ruohai Di1、*, Liangliang Li1, Weiyao Zhang1, and Hongxi Wang2
Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Electronic and Information Engineering, Xi'an Technological University, Xi'an, Shaaxi 710021, China
  • 2School of Mechatronic Engineering, Xi'an Technological University, Xi'an, Shaaxi 710021, China
    • show less
    AbstractGet PDF(in Chinese)
    Figures&Tables (32)
    Equations (0)
    References (23)
    Tools
    Paper Information
    Topics
    Figures & Tables(32)
    Relationship between data volume and error

    Fig. 1. Relationship between data volume and error

    Download full size
    Battlefield scenario of UAV threat assessment

    Fig. 2. Battlefield scenario of UAV threat assessment

    Download full size
    UAV threat assessment framework diagram

    Fig. 3. UAV threat assessment framework diagram

    Download full size
    BN structure matrix expression

    Fig. 4. BN structure matrix expression

    Download full size
    Construction flow chart of the constraint matrix

    Fig. 5. Construction flow chart of the constraint matrix

    Download full size
    Flow chart of BN structure learning algorithm based on matrix constraints

    Fig. 6. Flow chart of BN structure learning algorithm based on matrix constraints

    Download full size
    Flow chart of parameter learning algorithm based on prior constraints

    Fig. 7. Flow chart of parameter learning algorithm based on prior constraints

    Download full size
    Total BIC score of the algorithm proposed in this paper and the K2 algorithm

    Fig. 8. Total BIC score of the algorithm proposed in this paper and the K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Average BIC score of the algorithm proposed in this paper and K2 algorithm

    Fig. 9. Average BIC score of the algorithm proposed in this paper and K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Total Hamming distance between the algorithm in this paper and the K2 algorithm

    Fig. 10. Total Hamming distance between the algorithm in this paper and the K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Average Hamming distance between the algorithm in this paper and the K2 algorithm

    Fig. 11. Average Hamming distance between the algorithm in this paper and the K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network based on 20 sets of data by our algorithm

    Fig. 12. Threat assessment network based on 20 sets of data by our algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network based on 30 sets of data by our algorithm

    Fig. 13. Threat assessment network based on 30 sets of data by our algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network based on 40 sets of data by our algorithm

    Fig. 14. Threat assessment network based on 40 sets of data by our algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network based on 50 sets of data by our algorithm

    Fig. 15. Threat assessment network based on 50 sets of data by our algorithm

    Download full size
    UAV threat assessment network model structure

    Fig. 16. UAV threat assessment network model structure

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network derived from 40 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Fig. 17. Threat assessment network derived from 40 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network derived from 50 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Fig. 18. Threat assessment network derived from 50 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network derived from 60 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Fig. 19. Threat assessment network derived from 60 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Threat assessment network derived from 70 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Fig. 20. Threat assessment network derived from 70 sets of data by K2 algorithm

    Download full size
    Relationship between data volume and threat probability

    Fig. 21. Relationship between data volume and threat probability

    Download full size

    • Table 1. Discretization of target node information

      View table

      Table 1. Discretization of target node information

      Target node nameMeaningValue range and meaning
      Type information IWhich of the two types does the target belong to{1, 2}={I1: Warning radar, I2: Antiaircraft Artillery Position(AAP)}
      Confrontation information KCombat capability of target weapon{1, 2}={K1: yes, K2: no}
      Location information LWhether UAV is in the detection range of target attack and search{1, 2}={L1: no, L2: yes}
      Threat level information TThreat level of the UAV relative to the target at the current moment{1, 2}={T1: low, T2: high}

    • Table 2. Interval constraints corresponding to parameters

      View table

      Table 2. Interval constraints corresponding to parameters

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation (K1: yes,K2: no)Target location (L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)[0.3,0.7]([0.3,0.7], [0.3,0.7])([0.7,0.9], [0.1,0.3])([0.3,0.7], [0.3,0.7])
      T2(high)[0.3,0.7]([0.8,1], [0,0.2])([0.2,0.4], [0.6,0.8])([0.5,0.7], [0.3,0.5])

    • Table 3. Initial parameters of threat assessment model

      View table

      Table 3. Initial parameters of threat assessment model

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation (K1: yes,K2: no)Target location (L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.5(0.5,0.5)(0.8,0.2)(0.5,0.5)
      T2(high)0.5(0.9,0.1)(0.3,0.7)(0.6,0.4)

    • Table 4. 40 sets of data model parameters obtained by our algorithm

      View table

      Table 4. 40 sets of data model parameters obtained by our algorithm

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation(K1: yes,K2: no)Target location (L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.5173(0.4841,0.5159)(0.7866,0.2134)(0.5086,0.4914)
      T2(high)0.4827(0.9008,0.0992)(0.2240,0.7760)(0.64050.3595)

    • Table 5. 50 sets of data model parameters obtained from our algorithm

      View table

      Table 5. 50 sets of data model parameters obtained from our algorithm

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation (K1: yes,K2: no)Target location (L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.4867(0.4391,0.5609)(0.8094,0.1906)(0.4454,0.5546)
      T2(high)0.5133(0.8851,0.1149)(0.2189,0.7811)(0.5343,0.4657)

    • Table 6. 60 sets of data model parameters obtained by our algorithm

      View table

      Table 6. 60 sets of data model parameters obtained by our algorithm

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation (K1: yes,K2: no)Target location (L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.4657(0.4583,0.5417)(0.8146,0.1854)(0.4484,0.5516)
      T2(high)0.5343(0.8866,0.1134)(0.2380,0.7620)(0.5069,0.4931)

    • Table 7. Model parameters obtained from 60 sets of data by MLE algorithm

      View table

      Table 7. Model parameters obtained from 60 sets of data by MLE algorithm

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation (K1: yes,K2: no)Target location (L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.4750(0.4737,0.5263)(0.6184,0.3452)(0.4474,0.5526)
      T2(high)0.5250(0.6548,0.3452)(0.3929,0.6071)(0.4643,0.5357)

    • Table 8. Model parameters obtained from 70 sets of data by MLE algorithm

      View table

      Table 8. Model parameters obtained from 70 sets of data by MLE algorithm

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation(K1:yes,K2:no)Target location(L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.5286(0.3784,0.6216)(0.8649,0.1351)(0.4595,0.5405)
      T2(high)0.4714(0.7879,0.2121)(0.1212,0.8788)(0.6061,0.3939)

    • Table 9. Model parameters obtained from 80 sets of data by MLE algorithm

      View table

      Table 9. Model parameters obtained from 80 sets of data by MLE algorithm

      Target threat(T1: low,T2: high)Target type(I1: Warning radar,I2: AAP)Target confrontation(K1: yes,K2: no)Target location(L1: far,L2: near)
      T1(low)0.5875(0.4255,0.5745)(0.8298,0.1702)(0.3830,0.6170)
      T2(high)0.4125(0.9394,0.0606)(0.1515,0.8485)(0.6061,0.3939)

    • Table 10. KL-divergence results of this algorithm

      View table

      Table 10. KL-divergence results of this algorithm

      40 groups50 groups60 groups
      0.01630.01610.0156

    • Table 11. KL-divergence results of MLE algorithm

      View table

      Table 11. KL-divergence results of MLE algorithm

      60 groups70 groups80 groups
      0.01880.01600.0132
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Ye Li, Zhigang Lü, Ruohai Di, Liangliang Li, Weiyao Zhang, Hongxi Wang. Threat Assessment Method for UAV Based on a Bayesian Network with a Small Dataset[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2021, 58(16): 1628001

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Set citation alerts for article
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category: Remote Sensing and Sensors

    Received: Sep. 23, 2020

    Accepted: Dec. 8, 2020

    Published Online: Aug. 20, 2021

    The Author Email: Di Ruohai (xfwtdrh@163.com)

    DOI:10.3788/LOP202158.1628001

    Topics

    laser devices and laser physics
    Lasers and Laser Optics
    Laser physics
    laser manufacturing
    Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology