IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jglopt/v78y2020i4d10.1007_s10898-020-00938-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A heuristic and metaheuristic approach to the static weapon target assignment problem

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander G. Kline

    (US Army)

  • Darryl K. Ahner

    (WPAFB)

  • Brian J. Lunday

    (WPAFB)

Abstract

The weapon target assignment (WTA) problem, which has received much attention in the literature and is of continuing relevance, seeks within an air defense context to assign interceptors (weapons) to incoming missiles (targets) to maximize the probability of destroying the missiles. Kline et al. (J Heuristics 25:1–21, 2018) developed a heuristic algorithm based upon the solution to the Quiz Problem to solve the WTA. This heuristic found solutions within 6% of optimal, on average, for smaller problem instances and, when compared to a leading WTA heuristic from the literature, identified superlative solutions for larger instances within hundredths of a second, in lieu of minutes or hours of computational effort. Herein, we propose and test an improvement to the aforementioned heuristic, wherein a modified implementation iteratively blocks exiting assignments to an initial feasible solution, allowing superior solutions that would otherwise be prevented via a greedy selection process to be found. We compare these results to the optimal solutions as reported by a leading global optimization solver (i.e., BARON) and find solutions that are, at worst, within 2% of optimality and, at best, up to 64% better than the solutions reported to be optimal by BARON. To wit, the developed metaheuristic outperformed BARON in 25% of all instances tested, as BARON reported a suboptimal solution as being optimal for 21.1% of the instances, and it could not identify an optimal solution for the remaining 6.67% of the instances within 2 h of CPU time, a liberally imposed time limit that far exceeds practical usage considerations for this application.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander G. Kline & Darryl K. Ahner & Brian J. Lunday, 2020. "A heuristic and metaheuristic approach to the static weapon target assignment problem," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 78(4), pages 791-812, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jglopt:v:78:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10898-020-00938-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10898-020-00938-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10898-020-00938-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10898-020-00938-4?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. Ravindra K. Ahuja & Arvind Kumar & Krishna C. Jha & James B. Orlin, 2007. "Exact and Heuristic Algorithms for the Weapon-Target Assignment Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 1136-1146, December.
    2. Eitan Wacholder, 1989. "A Neural Network-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Static Weapon-Target Assignment Problem," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 232-246, November.
    3. Ojeong Kwon & Donghan Kang & Kyungsik Lee & Sungsoo Park, 1999. "Lagrangian relaxation approach to the targeting problem," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(6), pages 640-653, September.
    4. G. G. denBroeder & R. E. Ellison & L. Emerling, 1959. "On Optimum Target Assignments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 322-326, June.
    5. Alan S. Manne, 1958. "A Target-Assignment Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 346-351, June.
    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. Hughes, Michael S. & Lunday, Brian J., 2022. "The Weapon Target Assignment Problem: Rational Inference of Adversary Target Utility Valuations from Observed Solutions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    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. Alexander G. Kline & Darryl K. Ahner & Brian J. Lunday, 2019. "Real-time heuristic algorithms for the static weapon target assignment problem," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 377-397, June.
    2. Alexandre Colaers Andersen & Konstantin Pavlikov & Túlio A. M. Toffolo, 2022. "Weapon-target assignment problem: exact and approximate solution algorithms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(2), pages 581-606, May.
    3. Davis, Michael T. & Robbins, Matthew J. & Lunday, Brian J., 2017. "Approximate dynamic programming for missile defense interceptor fire control," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(3), pages 873-886.
    4. Chan Y. Han & Brian J. Lunday & Matthew J. Robbins, 2016. "A Game Theoretic Model for the Optimal Location of Integrated Air Defense System Missile Batteries," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 405-416, August.
    5. Lu, Yiping & Chen, Danny Z., 2021. "A new exact algorithm for the Weapon-Target Assignment problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    6. Anissa Frini & Adel Guitouni & Abderrezak Benaskeur, 2017. "Solving Dynamic Multi-Criteria Resource-Target Allocation Problem Under Uncertainty: A Comparison of Decomposition and Myopic Approaches," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1465-1496, November.
    7. Gülpınar, Nalan & Çanakoğlu, Ethem & Branke, Juergen, 2018. "Heuristics for the stochastic dynamic task-resource allocation problem with retry opportunities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(1), pages 291-303.
    8. Juan Li & Bin Xin & Panos M. Pardalos & Jie Chen, 2021. "Solving bi-objective uncertain stochastic resource allocation problems by the CVaR-based risk measure and decomposition-based multi-objective evolutionary algorithms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 639-666, January.
    9. Ravindra K. Ahuja & Arvind Kumar & Krishna C. Jha & James B. Orlin, 2007. "Exact and Heuristic Algorithms for the Weapon-Target Assignment Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 1136-1146, December.
    10. Ojeong Kwon & Donghan Kang & Kyungsik Lee & Sungsoo Park, 1999. "Lagrangian relaxation approach to the targeting problem," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(6), pages 640-653, September.
    11. Hughes, Michael S. & Lunday, Brian J., 2022. "The Weapon Target Assignment Problem: Rational Inference of Adversary Target Utility Valuations from Observed Solutions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Orhan Karasakal & Nur Evin Özdemirel & Levent Kandiller, 2011. "Anti‐ship missile defense for a naval task group," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(3), pages 304-321, April.
    13. Ahmet Silav & Esra Karasakal & Orhan Karasakal, 2022. "Bi-objective dynamic weapon-target assignment problem with stability measure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 1229-1247, April.
    14. Ahmet Silav & Orhan Karasakal & Esra Karasakal, 2019. "Bi‐objective missile rescheduling for a naval task group with dynamic disruptions," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(7), pages 596-615, October.
    15. Cha, Young-Ho & Kim, Yeong-Dae, 2010. "Fire scheduling for planned artillery attack operations under time-dependent destruction probabilities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 383-392, October.
    16. Ojeong Kwon & Kyungsik Lee & Donghan Kang & Sungsoo Park, 2007. "A branch‐and‐price algorithm for a targeting problem," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(7), pages 732-741, October.
    17. Cihan Çetinkaya & Samer Haffar, 2018. "A Risk-Based Location-Allocation Approach for Weapon Logistics," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-15, May.
    18. Daniel Selva & Bruce Cameron & Ed Crawley, 2016. "Patterns in System Architecture Decisions," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(6), pages 477-497, November.
    19. Lo, Shirleen Lee Yuen & How, Bing Shen & Leong, Wei Dong & Teng, Sin Yong & Rhamdhani, Muhammad Akbar & Sunarso, Jaka, 2021. "Techno-economic analysis for biomass supply chain: A state-of-the-art review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    20. Mehmet Fatih HocaoÄŸlu, 2022. "Agent-based target evaluation and fire doctrine: an aspect-oriented programming view," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 19(1), pages 107-121, January.

    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:spr:jglopt:v:78:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10898-020-00938-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.