国家自然科学基金(61876187)
[1] United States Air Force. RPA (Remotely Piloted Aircraft) Vector: Vision and Enabling Concepts 2013-2038. Report, 2014. Google Scholar
[2] Chen J, Xin B. Key scientific problems in the autonomous cooperation of manned-unmanned systems. SciSin Inform, 2018, 48: 1270-1274 CrossRef Google Scholar
[3] Shen L C, Niu Y F, Zhu H Y. Theories and Methods of Autonomous Cooperative Control for Multiple UAVs. 2 ed. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 2018. Google Scholar
[4] Mansur M H, Center A, Frye M, et al. Rapid prototyping and evaluation of control system designs for manned and unmanned applications. In: Proceedings of the 56th Forum and Technology Display, Virginia Beach, 2000. Google Scholar
[5] Levulis S J, Kim S Y, DeLucia P R. Effects of touch, voice, and multimodal input on multiple-UAV monitoring during simulated manned-unmanned teaming in a military helicopter. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2016. 60: 132--132. Google Scholar
[6] Lim Y X, Alessandro G, Roberto S, et al. Avionics human-machine interfaces and interactions formanned and unmanned aircraft. J Intell Robot Syst, 2018, 91: 755--774. Google Scholar
[7] Cummings M L, Guerlain S. Human performance issues in supervisory control of autonomous airborne vehicles. In: Proceedings of AUVSI Unmanned Systems North America Conference, 2004. Google Scholar
[8] Bertuccelli L F, Cummings M L. Operator Choice Modeling for Collaborative UAV Visual Search Tasks. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A, 2012, 42: 1088-1099 CrossRef Google Scholar
[9] Schmitt F, Schulte A. Mixed-Initiative Mission Planning Using Planning Strategy Models in Military Manned-Unmanned Teaming Missions. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2015. 1391--1396. Google Scholar
[10] Bevacqua G, Cacace J. Mixed-initiative planning and execution for multiple drones in search and rescue missions. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2015. Google Scholar
[11] North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Supervisory Control of Multiple Uninhabited Systems- Methodologies and Enabling Human-Robot Interface Technologies. Report, 2012. Google Scholar
[12] United States Air Force. Autonomous Horizons---System Autonomy in the Air Force ---A Path to the Future. Report, 2015. Google Scholar
[13] Ruf C, Stütz P. Model-driven sensor operation assistance for a transport helicopter crew in manned-unmanned teaming missions: selecting the automation level by machine decision-making. In: Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, 2017. 253--265. Google Scholar
[14] Yang J H, Kapolka M, Chung T H. Autonomy balancing in a manned-unmanned teaming (MUT) swarm attack. In: Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 2012. Berlin: Springer, 2013. 208: 561--569. Google Scholar
[15] United States Department of Defense. Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap FY2013-2038. Report, 2013. Google Scholar
[16] United States Air Force. Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (SUAS) Flight Plan: 2016-2036. Report, 2016. Google Scholar
[17] United States Air Force Research Laboratory. Cooperative Airspace Operations(CAO). Report, 2008. Google Scholar
[18] Lummus R. Mission battle management system fighter engagement manager concept. In: Proceedings of AIAA International Air and Space Symposium and Exposition: The Next 100 Years, Dayton, 2003. Google Scholar
[19] Onken R, Schulte A. System-Ergonomic Design of Cognitive Automation: Dual-Mode Cognitive Design of Vehicle Guidance and Control Work Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2010. Google Scholar
[20] Serrano D. Key Initiatives for Interoperability through Standardization-Applicability to Small Unmanned Vehicles. NATO Report, 2015. Google Scholar
[21] Gourley S R. Airborne manned/umanned system technology. Army Magazine, 2000, 50: 50. Google Scholar
[22] Wilkins D. Manned/unmanned common architecture program (MCAP): a review. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2003. 6.B.4/1-7. Google Scholar
[23] U.S. Air Force. Lockheed Martin Demonstrate Manned/Unmanned Teaming. https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2017-04-10-U-S-Air-Force-Lockheed-Martin-Demonstrate-Manned-Unmanned-Teaming. Google Scholar
[24] DARPA Tactical Technology Office. Collaborative Operations in Denied Environment (CODE) Program. Report. 2014. Google Scholar
[25] Defense Science Board, United States Department of Defense. The Role of Autonomy in DoD Systems. Report, 2012. Google Scholar
[26] United States Department of Defense. Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap FY2017-2042. Report, 2018. Google Scholar
[27] Wang Y C, Liu J G. Evaluation methods for the autonomy of unmanned systems. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 1290--1299. Google Scholar
[28] Jameson S, Franke J, Szczerba R, et al. Collaborative autonomy for manned/unmanned teams. In: Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 61th Annual Forum, Grapevine, 2005. Google Scholar
Figure 1
(Color online) Human-on-the-loop supervisory control system of UAVs
Figure 2
(Color online) The unmanned-manned teaming roadmap of USA
Figure 3
(Color online) The technological system of unmanned-manned aircraft system cooperative control
Figure 4
(Color online) The capability complemented autonomous cooperative control framework of unmanned-manned aircraft systems
Figure 5
(Color online) The dynamical function transfer of unmanned-manned aircraft systems
Figure 6
(Color online) The cooperative target perception process of unmanned-manned aircraft systems
Figure 7
(Color online) The inner data link of unmanned-manned aircraft systems
Figure 8
(Color online) The typical emergency events faced by unmanned-manned aircraft systems
Figure 9
(Color online) Self-synchronizing and self-learning of multi-platform cooperative behaviors
| Item | Cooperation of manned | Autonomous cooperation of |
| aircraft team | unmanned-manned aircraft team | |
| Command and control | The pilot needs only control own aircraft | The pilot controls own aircraft while |
| supervises multiple UAVs at the same time | ||
| Information sharing | Less information to share | More information links, |
| higher bandwidth requirements | ||
| Situation understanding | The pilot understands situation, | Vehicles understand situation |
| the computer makes aiding decision | and make mission decision | |
| Cooperation strategy | Relying mainly on preplan while | Preplan + real-time inter-vehicle |
| ground command subsidiary | coordination | |
| Contingency response | Alternative plan (event handling guidelines) | Cooperative contingency response |
| from both human and vehicles |
Download PDF
