Real-Time Safety Decision-Making Method for Multirotor Flight Strategies Based on TOPSIS Model
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Motivation and Main Methodology
2.1. Motivation
2.2. Overview of Flight Decision Algorithms
2.3. Construction of a Data-Driven Failure Level Classification Model for Multirotor
2.3.1. Real-Time Monitoring of Multirotor Flight Status and Establishment of a Condition Assessment Information Source
2.3.2. Construction of Failure Level Classification Model of Multirotor Based on Random Forest
2.4. Construction of Real-Time Attribute Decision-Making Model of Multirotor Based on TOPSIS
2.4.1. Construction of the Attribute-Strategy Matrix and Weight Matrix
2.4.2. Decision Method Based on TOPSIS Real-Time Attribute Data
3. Experimental Verification
3.1. Real-Time Monitoring of Flight Status of Multirotor and Establishment of Status Evaluation Information Source
3.2. Data-Driven Multirotor Aircraft Fault Classification Model Construction
3.3. Construction of Real-Time Attribute Decision Model of Multirotor Aircraft Based on TOPSIS
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Yao, P.; Zhu, Q.; Zhao, R. Gaussian Mixture Model and Self-Organizing Map Neural-Network-Based Coverage for Target Search in Curve-Shape Area. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2020, 52, 3971–3983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Agha-mohammadi, A.; Ure, N.K.; How, J.P.; Vian, J. Health aware stochastic planning for persistent package delivery missions using quadrotors. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Chicago, IL, USA, 14–18 September 2014; pp. 3389–3396. [Google Scholar]
- Yao, P.; Wang, H.; Ji, H. Gaussian mixture model and receding horizon control for multiple UAV search in complex environment. Nonlinear Dyn. 2017, 88, 903–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bethke, B.; How, J.; Vian, J. Multi-UAV persistent surveillance with communication constraints and health management. In Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 10–13 August 2009; p. 5654. [Google Scholar]
- Luo, Y.; Yan, J.; Zhao, Z.; Yang, S.; Quan, Q. A pesticide spraying mission assignment performed by multi-quadcopters and its simulation platform establishment. In Proceedings of the IEEE Chinese Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference (CGNCC), Nanjing, China, 12–14 August 2016; pp. 1980–1985. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, L.; Fan, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, E.; Peng, J.; Liang, Z. A review on state-of-the-art power line inspection techniques. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2020, 69, 9350–9365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, G.; Li, J.; Peng, J.; Hong, J. An efficient detection approach for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) small targets based on group convolution. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 5402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Q.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, X. Microbiological predictive modeling and risk analysis based on the one-step kinetic integrated Wiener process. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2022, 75, 102912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sudhakar, S.; Vijayakumar, V.; Kumar, C.S.; Priya, V.; Ravi, L.; Subramaniyaswamy, V. Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) based forest fire detection and monitoring for reducing false alarms in forest-fires. Comput. Commun. 2020, 149, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, X. Water quality evolution mechanism modeling and health risk assessment based on stochastic hybrid dynamic systems. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022, 193, 116404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elkhider, S.M.; El-Ferik, S.; Saif, A.W.A. Denial of Service Attack of QoS-Based Control of Multi-Agent Systems. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 4315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, M.; Chen, H.; Qin, F.; Stewart, C. Avis: In-Situ Model Checking for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN 2021), Taipei, Taiwan, 21–24 June 2021; pp. 471–483. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, X.; Wei, X.; Wang, X.; Guo, X.; Li, J.; Cheng, Z. Photovoltaic panel anomaly detection system based on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle platform. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 768, 072061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yao, P.; Wei, Y.; Zhao, Z. Null-space-based modulated reference trajectory generator for multi-robots formation in obstacle environment. ISA Trans. 2022, 123, 168–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, Z. Fault detection and identification method for quadcopter based on airframe vibration signals. Sensors 2021, 21, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boubeta-Puig, J.; Moguel, E.; Sánchez-Figueroa, F.; Hernández, J.; Preciado, J.C. An autonomous UAV architecture for remote sensing and intelligent decision-making. IEEE Internet Comput. 2018, 22, 6–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, I.; Lin, T.H.; Chang, S.H. A decision system for routing problems and rescheduling issues using unmanned aerial vehicles. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 6140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Zheng, Z.; Cai, K.Y. Bi-level programming based real-time path planning for unmanned aerial vehicles. Knowl. Based Syst. 2013, 44, 34–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zermani, S.; Dezan, C.; Euler, R. Embedded decision making for uav missions. In Proceedings of the IEEE 6th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO 2017), Bar, Montenergo, 11–15 June 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Zhou, Z.; Wang, R. Research on dynamic modeling and transition flight strategy of VTOL UAV. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zadeh, L. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 1965, 2021, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Qureshi, M.N.; Kumar, P.; Kumar, D. Framework for benchmarking logistics performance using fuzzy AHP. Int. J. Bus. Perform. Supply Chain Model. 2009, 1, 82–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wudhikarn, R.; Chakpitak, N.; Neubert, G. Improving the strategic benchmarking of intellectual capital management in logistics service providers. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.Q.; Li, J. The multi-criteria group decision making method based on multi-granularity intuitionistic two semantics. Sci. Technol. Inf. 2009, 33, 8–9. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, X.F.; Wang, J.Q.; Yang, W.E. Multi-criteria group decision making method based on intuitionistic linguistic aggregation operators. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2014, 26, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, P.; Wang, Y. Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on intuitionistic linguistic power generalized aggregation operators. Appl. Soft Comput. 2014, 17, 90–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ju, Y.; Liu, X.; Ju, D. Some new intuitionistic linguistic aggregation operators based on Maclaurin symmetric mean and their applications to multiple attribute group decision making. Soft Comput. 2016, 20, 4521–4548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, P.; Rong, L.; Chu, Y.; Li, Y. Intuitionistic linguistic weighted Bonferroni mean operator and its application to multiple attribute decision making. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 545049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, F.; Tang, J.; An, Q.; Chen, X. Decision making with intuitionistic linguistic preference relations. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 2019, 26, 2004–2031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xian, S.; Xiao, Y.; Yang, Z.; Li, Y.; Han, Z. A new trapezoidal Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic entropic combined ordered weighted averaging operator and its application for enterprise location. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2018, 33, 1880–1899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, Y.; Hou, F.; Zafar, W.; Yu, Q.; Zhai, Y. A novel method for multi attribute decision making with interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic information. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2017, 32, 1085–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jun, Y.B.; Kim, C.S.; Yang, K.O. Cubic Sets. Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 2011, 2, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
- Garg, H.; Kaur, G. Extended TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision-making problems under cubic intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Sci. Iran. 2020, 27, 396–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Garg, H.; Kaur, G. TOPSIS based on nonlinear-programming methodology for solving decision-making problems under cubic intuitionistic fuzzy set environment. Comput. Appl. Math. 2019, 38, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamurcu, M.; Eren, T. Selection of unmanned aerial vehicles by using multicriteria decision-making for defence. J. Math. 2020, 2020, 4308756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karaşan, A.; Kaya, İ. Neutrosophic TOPSIS method for technology evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, Istanbul, Turkey, 23–25 July 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Atyabi, A.; MahmoudZadeh, S.; Nefti-Meziani, S. Current advancements on autonomous mission planning and management systems: An AUV and UAV perspective. Annu. Rev. Control 2018, 46, 196–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, P.; Wu, H.; Wang, W.; Ma, W.; Sun, X.; Lu, Z. MiPred: Classification of real and pseudo microRNA precursors using random forest prediction model with combined features. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007, 35, W339–W344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Abbreviation | Grade | Vague Value Range | Typical Vague Value |
---|---|---|---|
Absolute (AH) | Absolutely high | [1, 1] | [1, 1] |
Very high (VH) | Very high | [0.9, 1] | [0.9, 0.95] |
Height (h) | High | [0.85, 0.9] | [0.8, 0.9] |
Higher (FH) | Fairly high | [0.7, 0.85] | [0.7, 0.85] |
Medium (MH) | Medium high | [0.6, 0.8] | [0.6, 0.8] |
Medium (m) | Medium | [0.5, 0.5] | [0.5, 0.5] |
Medium low (ML) | Medium low | [0.45, 0.6] | [0.4, 0.6] |
Low (FL) | Fairy low | [0.3, 0.45] | [0.3, 0.45] |
Low (l) | Low | [0.15, 0.3] | [0.2, 0.3] |
Very low (VL) | Very low | [0, 0.15] | [0.1, 0.15] |
Absolute low (AL) | Absolutely low | [0, 0] | [0, 0] |
Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1-Score | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Random forest | 0.978 | 0.9928 | 0.9786 | 0.9856 |
SVM | 0.957 | 0.9855 | 0.9714 | 0.9784 |
Adaboost | 0.951 | 0.9852 | 0.95 | 0.9673 |
Naive Bayes | 0.978 | 1 | 0.9714 | 0.9855 |
KNN | 0.941 | 0.9645 | 0.9714 | 0.9679 |
Logistic regression | 0.968 | 0.9786 | 0.9786 | 0.9786 |
b1 (Disaster) | b2 (Danger) | b3 (Slight) | b4 (Electricity) | b5 (Obstacle) | b6 (Wind Interference) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a1 (return) | L | AH | VL | ML | M | L |
a2 (landing) | AH | MH | MH | VH | FH | H |
a3 (dot hovering) | VL | FL | AH | FL | MH | ML |
a4 (keep flying) | TO THE | VL | M | TO THE | FL | VL |
b1 | b2 | b3 | b4 | b5 | b6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a1 | [0.2, 0.3] | [0.9, 0.95] | [0.1, 0.15] | [0.4, 0.6] | [0.5, 0.5] | [0.2, 0.3] |
a2 | [1, 1] | [0.6, 0.8] | [0.6, 0.8] | [0.9, 0.95] | [0.7, 0.85] | [0.8, 0.9] |
a3 | [0.1, 0.15] | [0.3, 0.45] | [1, 1] | [0.3, 0.45] | [0.6, 0.8] | [0.4, 0.6] |
a4 | [0, 0] | [0.1, 0.15] | [0.5, 0.5] | [0, 0] | [0.3, 0.45] | [0.1, 0.15] |
b1 | b2 | b3 | b4 | b5 | b6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a1 | 0.0497 | 0.1486 | 0.2048 | 0.1726 | 0.3746 | 0.0497 |
a2 | 0.0396 | 0.1437 | 0.1437 | 0.1791 | 0.1598 | 0.1855 |
a3 | 0.0326 | 0.1486 | 0.2466 | 0.1486 | 0.1278 | 0.1653 |
a4 | 0 | 0.2497 | 0.1490 | 0 | 0.1994 | 0.2497 |
b1 (Disaster) | b2 (Danger) | b3 (Slight) | b4 (Electricity) | b5 (Obstacle) | b6 (Wind Interference) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 0 | 0.67 | 0.12 | 0.36 |
b1 (Disaster) | b2 (Danger) | b3 (Slight) | b4 (Electricity) | b5 (Obstacle) | b6 (Wind Interference) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 1 | 0.80 | 0 | 0.20 |
0 | 1 | 0 | 0.70 | 0 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0.50 | 0 | 0.30 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Cui, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, Z. Real-Time Safety Decision-Making Method for Multirotor Flight Strategies Based on TOPSIS Model. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 6696. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136696
Cui X, Zhang X, Zhao Z. Real-Time Safety Decision-Making Method for Multirotor Flight Strategies Based on TOPSIS Model. Applied Sciences. 2022; 12(13):6696. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136696
Chicago/Turabian StyleCui, Xiaoyu, Xiaomin Zhang, and Zhiyao Zhao. 2022. "Real-Time Safety Decision-Making Method for Multirotor Flight Strategies Based on TOPSIS Model" Applied Sciences 12, no. 13: 6696. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136696