两种不同雷场过境模式的定量比较

Mikel D Petty
{"title":"两种不同雷场过境模式的定量比较","authors":"Mikel D Petty","doi":"10.1177/15485129241257528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Naval mines are used to cause damage and inflict casualties on ships and to deny access to mined areas. Two distinctly different Monte Carlo models of surface ships transiting minefields were implemented and compared. An analytic model represents mines abstractly as mine density within the minefield. It determines the probability of a ship encountering a mine as a ratio of the area of the ship’s track through the minefield, with width equal to the mines’ effective radius and the area of the minefield. A geometric model represents the ship’s track and the mines’ locations explicitly. It determines whether a ship encounters a mine using a calculation of the distance between a ship’s track and the mines’ locations. The two models’ results were quantitatively compared for multiple values of five experimental variables: minefield dimensions, mine density, mine placement method, ships per group, and ship transit procedure. Each model was executed for each combination of experimental variable values and their results were compared to determine whether the models produced comparable results. In addition, the effectiveness of two mine placement methods at disabling ships and two ship transit procedures at avoiding mines were also compared. All comparisons used statistical hypothesis tests.","PeriodicalId":508000,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A quantitative comparison of two different models of minefield transit\",\"authors\":\"Mikel D Petty\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15485129241257528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Naval mines are used to cause damage and inflict casualties on ships and to deny access to mined areas. Two distinctly different Monte Carlo models of surface ships transiting minefields were implemented and compared. An analytic model represents mines abstractly as mine density within the minefield. It determines the probability of a ship encountering a mine as a ratio of the area of the ship’s track through the minefield, with width equal to the mines’ effective radius and the area of the minefield. A geometric model represents the ship’s track and the mines’ locations explicitly. It determines whether a ship encounters a mine using a calculation of the distance between a ship’s track and the mines’ locations. The two models’ results were quantitatively compared for multiple values of five experimental variables: minefield dimensions, mine density, mine placement method, ships per group, and ship transit procedure. Each model was executed for each combination of experimental variable values and their results were compared to determine whether the models produced comparable results. In addition, the effectiveness of two mine placement methods at disabling ships and two ship transit procedures at avoiding mines were also compared. All comparisons used statistical hypothesis tests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15485129241257528\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15485129241257528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

海军水雷用于对舰船造成破坏和伤亡,并阻止舰船进入雷区。对水面舰艇通过雷场的两种截然不同的蒙特卡罗模型进行了实施和比较。分析模型将水雷抽象地表示为雷区内的水雷密度。它将船只遇到水雷的概率确定为船只通过雷场的航迹面积与水雷有效半径和雷场面积之比。几何模型明确表示了船只的航迹和水雷的位置。它通过计算船只航迹与水雷位置之间的距离来确定船只是否遇到水雷。针对五个实验变量的多个值,对两种模型的结果进行了定量比较:雷区尺寸、水雷密度、水雷布设方法、每组船只和船只过境程序。对每个实验变量值的组合执行每个模型,并对其结果进行比较,以确定模型是否产生了可比较的结果。此外,还比较了两种水雷布设方法在使船只失能方面的效果,以及两种船只通过程序在避开水雷方面的效果。所有比较均采用统计假设检验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A quantitative comparison of two different models of minefield transit
Naval mines are used to cause damage and inflict casualties on ships and to deny access to mined areas. Two distinctly different Monte Carlo models of surface ships transiting minefields were implemented and compared. An analytic model represents mines abstractly as mine density within the minefield. It determines the probability of a ship encountering a mine as a ratio of the area of the ship’s track through the minefield, with width equal to the mines’ effective radius and the area of the minefield. A geometric model represents the ship’s track and the mines’ locations explicitly. It determines whether a ship encounters a mine using a calculation of the distance between a ship’s track and the mines’ locations. The two models’ results were quantitatively compared for multiple values of five experimental variables: minefield dimensions, mine density, mine placement method, ships per group, and ship transit procedure. Each model was executed for each combination of experimental variable values and their results were compared to determine whether the models produced comparable results. In addition, the effectiveness of two mine placement methods at disabling ships and two ship transit procedures at avoiding mines were also compared. All comparisons used statistical hypothesis tests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A quantitative comparison of two different models of minefield transit Cutting edge technologies for future military applications: trends and challenges Developing an IoT-enabled probabilistic model for quick identification of hidden radioactive materials in maritime port operations to strengthen global supply chain security Statement of requirements on the accuracy of rocket CFD analysis using exterior ballistics for example rocket models Enhancing military medical evacuation dispatching with armed escort management: comparing model-based reinforcement learning approaches
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1