Exploration of a Capability-Focused Aerospace System of Systems Architecture Alternative with Bilayer Design Space, Based on RST-SOM Algorithmic Methods
In defense related programs, the use of capability-based analysis, design, and acquisition has been significant. In order to confront one of the most challenging features of a huge design space in capability based analysis (CBA), a literature review of design space exploration was first examined. Then, in the process of an aerospace system of systems design space exploration, a bilayer mapping method was put forward, based on the existing experimental and operating data. Finally, the feasibility of the foregoing approach was demonstrated with an illustrative example. With the data mining RST (rough sets theory) and SOM (self-organized mapping) techniques, the alternative to the aerospace system of systems architecture was mapping from P-space (performance space) to C-space (configuration space), and then from C-space to D-space (design space), respectively. Ultimately, the performance space was mapped to the design space, which completed the exploration and preliminary reduction of the entire design space. This method provides a computational analysis and implementation scheme for large-scale simulation.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction, “Joint capabilities integration and development system,” Defense Acquisition University CJCSI 3170.01G, 2009.View at: Google Scholar
L. Eriksson, E. Johansson, N. Kettaneh-Wold, C. Wikström, and S. Wold, Design of Experiments: Principles and Applications, Umetrics Academy, Umeå, Sweden, 2000.
F. Pukelsheim, Optimal Design of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1993.
N. Metropolis and S. Ulam, “The Monte Carlo method,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 44, no. 247, pp. 335–341, 1949.View at: Google Scholar
M. Stein, “Large sample properties of simulations using latin hypercube sampling,” Technometrics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 143–151, 1987.View at: Google Scholar
R. C. Bose and K. A. Bush, “Orthogonal Arrays of Strength two and three,” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 508–524, 1952.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. T. Fang and C. Ma, Orthogonal and Uniform Design Experimentation, Science Press, Beijing, China, 2001.
K. T. Fang, “The uniform design: application of number-theoretic methods in experimental design,” Acta Mathematicae Applicatae Sinica, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 363–372, 1980.View at: Google Scholar
D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1991.
S. Chen, C. F. N. Cowan, and P. M. Grant, “Orthogonal least squares learning algorithm for radial basis function networks,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 302–309, 1991.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. D. Cliff and J. K. Ord, “Model building and the analysis of spatial patterns in human geography—with discussion,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 297–348, 1975.View at: Google Scholar
P. Afentakis and B. Gavish, “Optimal lot-sizing algorithms for complex product structures,” Operations Research, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 237–249, 1986.View at: Google Scholar
K. Saitou, K. Izui, S. Nishiwaki, and P. Papalambros, “A survey of structural optimization in mechanical product development,” Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 214–226, 2005.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Danilovic and T. R. Browning, “Managing complex product development projects with design structure matrices and domain mapping matrices,” International Journal of Project Management, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 300–314, 2007.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Pongcharoen, C. Hicks, and P. M. Braiden, “The development of genetic algorithms for the finite capacity scheduling of complex products, with multiple levels of product structure,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 152, no. 1, pp. 215–225, 2004.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Griendling, ARCHITECT: the architecture-based technology evaluation and capability tradeoff methodology [Ph.D. thesis], Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga, USA, 2011.