CONFLICT RESOLUTION FOR FREE FLIGHT CONSIDERING DEGREE OF DANGER AND CONCESSION

Mustafa Suphi Erden, Kemal Leblebicioğlu

Abstract

In this study a conflict resolution technique based on danger and concession considerations is presented for free flight paradigm. A danger function which assigns a danger value for the conflict situation, and a concession function which assigns a concession value for the path followed by the aircraft are constructed. The danger and concession values are input to a fuzzy decision module. This module outputs the amount of deviation from the optimal path and the conflict is solved following these deviations. The method presented here is the third method we have been studying regarding to the conflict resolution problem. Its results are presented with a comparison to our other two studies.

References

  1. Alliot, JM., H. Gruber, G. Jolly, M. Schoenauer, 1992. Genetic algorithms for solving air traffic control conflicts. In Proceedings 9th IEEE Conference of Artificial Intelligence Application, August 1992.
  2. Bicchi, A., L. Pallottino, 2000. On optimal cooperative conflict resolution for air traffic management systems. In Proceedings IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, December 2000.
  3. Bosc, J.F., G. Dean, 1997. An implementation of reactive distributed air conflict resolution system. In: Proceedings IEEE.
  4. Bui, T., J. Lee, 1999. An agent based framework for building decision support systems. In Decision Support Systems 25 (1999) 225-237.
  5. Clements, J.C., 1999. The optimal control of collision avoidance trajectories in air traffic management. In Transportation Research Part B 33 (1999) 265-280.
  6. Eby, M., and Kelly, W., 1999. Free Flight Separation Assurance Using Distributed Algorithms. In Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Vol. 2, pp. 429-441.
  7. Erden, M.S., K. Leblebicioglu, U. Halici, 2001. Çok ajanli system yaklasimiyla hava trafigi kontrolü, In 9.Sinyal Isleme ve Uygulamalari Kurultayi, April 2001, Gazimagosa - KKTC.
  8. Erden, M.S., K. Leblebicioglu, U. Halici, 2002. Conflict resolution by negotiation. Abstract In IFAC 15th World Congress Book of Abstracts, 230, Barcelona, Spain, July 2002; full paper in the related CD.
  9. Faratin, P., C. Sierra, N.R. Jennings, 1998. Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents. In Robotics and Autonomous Systems 24 (1998) 159-182.
  10. Mbede, J.B., X. Huang, M. Wang, 2000. Fuzzy motion planning among dynamic obstacles using fields for robot manipulators. In Robotics and autonomous systems 32 (2000) 61-72.
  11. McFetridge, L., M. Y. Ibrahim, 1998. New technique of mobile robot navigation using a hybrid adaptive fuzzy potential field approach. In Computers Ind. Engng. 35 (3-4) (1998) 471-474.
  12. Mesterton-Gibbons, M., 1992. An Introduction to Game Theoretic Modelling, Redwood City,
  13. Özdemir, S.Z., 2001. Proposal of two system modeling practices: “Fuzzy discrete event dynamical systems and fuzzy differential game theory”, M.S. Thesis, Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, METU, Ankara, 2001.
  14. Pappas, G.J., C.J. Tomlin, J. Lygeros, D.N. Godbole and S.S. Sastry, 1997. A next generation architecture for air traffic management systems. In IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp 2405-2440, San Diego, California, USA, December 10-12, 1997.
  15. Perry, T.S., 1997. In search of the future of air traffic control, In IEEE Spectrum 34 (8) (August 1997) 19- 35.
  16. Petrick, H., M. C. Felix, 1998. A soft dynamic programming approach for on-line aircraft 4-D trajectory optimization. In European Journal of Operational Research 107 (1998) 87-95.
  17. Reif, J.H., H. Wang, 1999. Social potential fields: a distributed behavioral control for autonomous robots. In Robotics and Autonomous Systems 27, (1999) 171- 194.
  18. Sekhavat, S., S.Sastry. 1998. A distributed automatic air traffic management system. In Proc. of the Int. Symp. on Robotics and Automation, Saltillo (MX), December 1998.
  19. Tomlin C., G. J. Pappas, and S. Sastry, 1998. Conflict Resolution for Air Traffic Management: A Study in Multi-Agent Hybrid Systems. In IEEE Trans. Automatic Control, vol. 43, no. 4, 1998, pp. 509-521.
  20. Tomlin, C., G. Pappas, J. Kosecka, J. Lygeros, S. Sastry, 1998. 2-1/2 D Conflict resolution maneuvers for ATMS, In Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision & Control, Tampa, Florida USA, December 1998.
  21. Tomlin, C., R. Ghosh, 2000. Maneuver design for multiple aircraft conflict resolution. In Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Chicago, Illinos, June 2000.
  22. Wangermann, J.P., R.F. Stengel, 1998. Principled negotiation between agents: a model for air traffic management. In Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 12 (1998) 177-187.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Erden M. and Leblebicioğlu K. (2004). CONFLICT RESOLUTION FOR FREE FLIGHT CONSIDERING DEGREE OF DANGER AND CONCESSION . In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics - Volume 1: ICINCO, ISBN 972-8865-12-0, pages 185-192. DOI: 10.5220/0001133501850192


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icinco04,
author={Mustafa Suphi Erden and Kemal Leblebicioğlu},
title={CONFLICT RESOLUTION FOR FREE FLIGHT CONSIDERING DEGREE OF DANGER AND CONCESSION},
booktitle={Proceedings of the First International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics - Volume 1: ICINCO,},
year={2004},
pages={185-192},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0001133501850192},
isbn={972-8865-12-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the First International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics - Volume 1: ICINCO,
TI - CONFLICT RESOLUTION FOR FREE FLIGHT CONSIDERING DEGREE OF DANGER AND CONCESSION
SN - 972-8865-12-0
AU - Erden M.
AU - Leblebicioğlu K.
PY - 2004
SP - 185
EP - 192
DO - 10.5220/0001133501850192