IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v287y2020i3p856-874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

AI-based competition of autonomous vehicle fleets with application to fleet modularity

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Xingyu
  • Epureanu, Bogdan I.

Abstract

Because operational environments change over time and technology upgrades are common in fleets of ground vehicles, a large number of vehicles quickly become obsolete. A possible solution is to develop fleets of modular vehicles, which are built with interchangeable components, i.e. modules. This paper evaluates the performance of a future reconfigurable and autonomous vehicle fleet in a high fidelity military operation scenario. The military fleet operates in a hostile environment under a high risk of damage and needs to react to adversarial actions in real-time. The operation decisions are numerous including vehicle reconfiguration, relocation, damage recovery, and dispatch decisions. Given the limited resources and time delays in the operation, decision effectiveness and foresightedness are necessities, which require a good understanding of the adversary, close collaboration among commanders, and breaking of the equilibrium between adversaries. To capture these characteristics, we formulate an intelligent agent-based model for the decision-making process during fleet operations by combining real-time optimization with artificial intelligence. With continuous updating of learning models, the intelligent agents refine their decisions during interactions with the environment and other agents, and evolve their competition strategies according to adversarial historical behaviors. With the same level of resources, the conventional fleet wins when the dispatch decisions are stochastic. However, once each fleets start to learn from each other’s behavior, the modular fleet outperforms the conventional fleet. The strategic and operational benefits of fleet modularity are revealed and discussed in terms of win rate, adaptability, unpredictability and damage recovery.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Xingyu & Epureanu, Bogdan I., 2020. "AI-based competition of autonomous vehicle fleets with application to fleet modularity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 856-874.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:287:y:2020:i:3:p:856-874
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2020.05.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221720304501
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.05.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ardi Tampuu & Tambet Matiisen & Dorian Kodelja & Ilya Kuzovkin & Kristjan Korjus & Juhan Aru & Jaan Aru & Raul Vicente, 2017. "Multiagent cooperation and competition with deep reinforcement learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Chen Wang & Vicki M. Bier, 2011. "Target-Hardening Decisions Based on Uncertain Multiattribute Terrorist Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 286-302, December.
    3. Azaiez, M.N. & Bier, Vicki M., 2007. "Optimal resource allocation for security in reliability systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 773-786, September.
    4. Zhang, Jing & Zhuang, Jun & Jose, Victor Richmond R., 2018. "The role of risk preferences in a multi-target defender-attacker resource allocation game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 95-104.
    5. Onggo, Bhakti Stephan & Karatas, Mumtaz, 2016. "Test-driven simulation modelling: A case study using agent-based maritime search-operation simulation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(2), pages 517-531.
    6. Jahangoshai Rezaee, Mustafa & Jozmaleki, Mehrdad & Valipour, Mahsa, 2018. "Integrating dynamic fuzzy C-means, data envelopment analysis and artificial neural network to online prediction performance of companies in stock exchange," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 489(C), pages 78-93.
    7. George S. Atsalakis & Ioanna G. Atsalaki & Constantin Zopounidis, 2018. "Forecasting the success of a new tourism service by a neuro-fuzzy technique," Post-Print hal-02879866, HAL.
    8. Yu, Lean & Wang, Shouyang & Lai, Kin Keung, 2009. "An intelligent-agent-based fuzzy group decision making model for financial multicriteria decision support: The case of credit scoring," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(3), pages 942-959, June.
    9. Fischer, Thomas & Krauss, Christopher, 2017. "Deep learning with long short-term memory networks for financial market predictions," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 11/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics.
    10. Zhuang, Jun & Bier, Vicki M. & Alagoz, Oguzhan, 2010. "Modeling secrecy and deception in a multiple-period attacker-defender signaling game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 409-418, June.
    11. Jie Xu & Jun Zhuang & Zigeng Liu, 2016. "Modeling and mitigating the effects of supply chain disruption in a defender–attacker game," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 255-270, January.
    12. Paulson, Elisabeth C. & Linkov, Igor & Keisler, Jeffrey M., 2016. "A game theoretic model for resource allocation among countermeasures with multiple attributes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(2), pages 610-622.
    13. Patrick Roos & Dana Nau, 2010. "Risk Preference And Sequential Choice In Evolutionary Games," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 559-578.
    14. Powell, Robert, 2007. "Defending against Terrorist Attacks with Limited Resources," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(3), pages 527-541, August.
    15. Hausken, Kjell & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Minmax defense strategy for complex multi-state systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 577-587.
    16. Atsalakis, George S. & Atsalaki, Ioanna G. & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2018. "Forecasting the success of a new tourism service by a neuro-fuzzy technique," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(2), pages 716-727.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Xingyu & Krivtsov, Vasiliy & Arora, Karunesh, 2022. "Attention-based deep survival model for time series data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    2. Ahmed, Abdulaziz & Topuz, Kazim & Moqbel, Murad & Abdulrashid, Ismail, 2024. "What makes accidents severe! explainable analytics framework with parameter optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(2), pages 425-436.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    2. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2013. "Hybrid defensive resource allocations in the face of partially strategic attackers in a sequential defender–attacker game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 262-272.
    3. Hausken, Kjell, 2024. "Fifty Years of Operations Research in Defense," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 355-368.
    4. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2018. "Modeling cumulative defensive resource allocation against a strategic attacker in a multi-period multi-target sequential game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 12-26.
    5. Kjell Hausken, 2019. "Special versus general protection and attack of two assets," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 29(4), pages 53-93.
    6. Zhang, Chi & Ramirez-Marquez, José Emmanuel & Wang, Jianhui, 2015. "Critical infrastructure protection using secrecy – A discrete simultaneous game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 212-221.
    7. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "Intelligence and impact contests in systems with redundancy, false targets, and partial protection," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(12), pages 1927-1941.
    8. Chi Zhang & Jose Ramirez-Marquez, 2013. "Protecting critical infrastructures against intentional attacks: a two-stage game with incomplete information," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 244-258.
    9. Qingqing Zhai & Rui Peng & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Defender–Attacker Games with Asymmetric Player Utilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 408-420, February.
    10. Paulson, Elisabeth C. & Linkov, Igor & Keisler, Jeffrey M., 2016. "A game theoretic model for resource allocation among countermeasures with multiple attributes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(2), pages 610-622.
    11. Asma Ben Yaghlane & Mohamed Naceur Azaiez, 2019. "System survivability to continuous attacks: A game theoretic setting for constant attack rate processes," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(8), pages 1308-1320, August.
    12. Talarico, Luca & Reniers, Genserik & Sörensen, Kenneth & Springael, Johan, 2015. "MISTRAL: A game-theoretical model to allocate security measures in a multi-modal chemical transportation network with adaptive adversaries," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 105-114.
    13. Xiaojun (Gene) Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2014. "Modeling Credible Retaliation Threats in Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons Using Partial Inspection---A Three-Stage Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 43-62, March.
    14. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Mehmet Gümüs, 2015. "On the value of terrorist’s private information in a government’s defensive resource allocation problem," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(6), pages 533-555, June.
    15. Ben Yaghlane, Asma & Azaiez, M. Naceur, 2017. "Systems under attack-survivability rather than reliability: Concept, results, and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1156-1164.
    16. Kjell Hausken, 2014. "Individual versus overarching protection and attack of assets," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 22(1), pages 89-112, March.
    17. Ye, Zhi-Sheng & Peng, Rui & Wang, Wenbin, 2017. "Defense and attack of performance-sharing common bus systemsAuthor-Name: Zhai, Qingqing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 962-975.
    18. Zhang, Xiaoxiong & Ding, Song & Ge, Bingfeng & Xia, Boyuan & Pedrycz, Witold, 2021. "Resource allocation among multiple targets for a defender-attacker game with false targets consideration," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    19. Cen Song & Jun Zhuang, 2017. "Two-stage security screening strategies in the face of strategic applicants, congestions and screening errors," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 258(2), pages 237-262, November.
    20. Hausken, Kjell, 2017. "Defense and attack for interdependent systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(2), pages 582-591.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:287:y:2020:i:3:p:856-874. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.