Loading…

Comparison of air and ground conflict detection and resolution algorithms and their implications

Decision support tools (DSTs) designed to allow airspace users to maintain separation will become increasingly critical as more direct routes, free maneuvering, self-separation, and distributed air-ground traffic management concepts evolve. One type of DST, conflict detection and resolution (CD&...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kopardekar, P., Sacco, N., Mogford, R.
Format: Conference Proceeding
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 2B1
container_issue
container_start_page 2B1
container_title
container_volume 1
creator Kopardekar, P.
Sacco, N.
Mogford, R.
description Decision support tools (DSTs) designed to allow airspace users to maintain separation will become increasingly critical as more direct routes, free maneuvering, self-separation, and distributed air-ground traffic management concepts evolve. One type of DST, conflict detection and resolution (CD&R) tools, will play an important role in air traffic management both on the ground and in the air. A number of aircraft CD&R algorithms have been developed in recent years; however, there is no detailed competitive analysis that clearly demonstrates their effectiveness and efficiency. Kuchar and Yang (1997) surveyed multiple algorithms and documented their strengths, but the impact on the users of these algorithms has not yet been tested in simulated conditions with realistic traffic situations. Most of the studies examining individual algorithm effectiveness use either the fast-time or Monte Carlo process. Therefore, there is a need to examine and compare the effectiveness of these algorithms from a human-centered perspective.
doi_str_mv 10.1109/DASC.2002.1067913
format conference_proceeding
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>ieee_6IE</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_1067913</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>1067913</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>1067913</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-ieee_primary_10679133</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9jk0KwjAQhQMiKNoDiJtcwJo0tT9LqYp73dfQpu1I0pQkXXh7U3XtMPCY-d4bBqENJSGlJN-fjrcijAiJQkqSNKdshoI8zYhvljK_WaDA2ifxFR9oFidL9Ci0GrgBq3usG8zBYN7XuDV69FLpvpFQOVwLJyoH3jRRI6yW43eUrTbgOmU_xHXCXwA1-BSfDHaN5g2XVgQ_XaHt5XwvrjsQQpSDAcXNq_z9y_7TN0OWRhs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>Comparison of air and ground conflict detection and resolution algorithms and their implications</title><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</source><creator>Kopardekar, P. ; Sacco, N. ; Mogford, R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kopardekar, P. ; Sacco, N. ; Mogford, R.</creatorcontrib><description>Decision support tools (DSTs) designed to allow airspace users to maintain separation will become increasingly critical as more direct routes, free maneuvering, self-separation, and distributed air-ground traffic management concepts evolve. One type of DST, conflict detection and resolution (CD&amp;R) tools, will play an important role in air traffic management both on the ground and in the air. A number of aircraft CD&amp;R algorithms have been developed in recent years; however, there is no detailed competitive analysis that clearly demonstrates their effectiveness and efficiency. Kuchar and Yang (1997) surveyed multiple algorithms and documented their strengths, but the impact on the users of these algorithms has not yet been tested in simulated conditions with realistic traffic situations. Most of the studies examining individual algorithm effectiveness use either the fast-time or Monte Carlo process. Therefore, there is a need to examine and compare the effectiveness of these algorithms from a human-centered perspective.</description><identifier>ISBN: 9780780373679</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 0780373677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/DASC.2002.1067913</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>IEEE</publisher><subject>Air traffic control ; Aircraft ; Algorithm design and analysis ; Fuels ; Logic ; Monte Carlo methods ; NASA ; Testing ; Timing ; Traffic control</subject><ispartof>Proceedings. The 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2002, Vol.1, p.2B1-2B1</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1067913$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,780,784,789,790,2058,4050,4051,27925,54920</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1067913$$EView_record_in_IEEE$$FView_record_in_$$GIEEE</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kopardekar, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sacco, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mogford, R.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of air and ground conflict detection and resolution algorithms and their implications</title><title>Proceedings. The 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference</title><addtitle>DASC</addtitle><description>Decision support tools (DSTs) designed to allow airspace users to maintain separation will become increasingly critical as more direct routes, free maneuvering, self-separation, and distributed air-ground traffic management concepts evolve. One type of DST, conflict detection and resolution (CD&amp;R) tools, will play an important role in air traffic management both on the ground and in the air. A number of aircraft CD&amp;R algorithms have been developed in recent years; however, there is no detailed competitive analysis that clearly demonstrates their effectiveness and efficiency. Kuchar and Yang (1997) surveyed multiple algorithms and documented their strengths, but the impact on the users of these algorithms has not yet been tested in simulated conditions with realistic traffic situations. Most of the studies examining individual algorithm effectiveness use either the fast-time or Monte Carlo process. Therefore, there is a need to examine and compare the effectiveness of these algorithms from a human-centered perspective.</description><subject>Air traffic control</subject><subject>Aircraft</subject><subject>Algorithm design and analysis</subject><subject>Fuels</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Monte Carlo methods</subject><subject>NASA</subject><subject>Testing</subject><subject>Timing</subject><subject>Traffic control</subject><isbn>9780780373679</isbn><isbn>0780373677</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><sourceid>6IE</sourceid><recordid>eNp9jk0KwjAQhQMiKNoDiJtcwJo0tT9LqYp73dfQpu1I0pQkXXh7U3XtMPCY-d4bBqENJSGlJN-fjrcijAiJQkqSNKdshoI8zYhvljK_WaDA2ifxFR9oFidL9Ci0GrgBq3usG8zBYN7XuDV69FLpvpFQOVwLJyoH3jRRI6yW43eUrTbgOmU_xHXCXwA1-BSfDHaN5g2XVgQ_XaHt5XwvrjsQQpSDAcXNq_z9y_7TN0OWRhs</recordid><startdate>2002</startdate><enddate>2002</enddate><creator>Kopardekar, P.</creator><creator>Sacco, N.</creator><creator>Mogford, R.</creator><general>IEEE</general><scope>6IE</scope><scope>6IH</scope><scope>CBEJK</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>RIO</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2002</creationdate><title>Comparison of air and ground conflict detection and resolution algorithms and their implications</title><author>Kopardekar, P. ; Sacco, N. ; Mogford, R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-ieee_primary_10679133</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Air traffic control</topic><topic>Aircraft</topic><topic>Algorithm design and analysis</topic><topic>Fuels</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Monte Carlo methods</topic><topic>NASA</topic><topic>Testing</topic><topic>Timing</topic><topic>Traffic control</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kopardekar, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sacco, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mogford, R.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plan (POP) 1998-present by volume</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore All Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore (Online service)</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plans (POP) 1998-present</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kopardekar, P.</au><au>Sacco, N.</au><au>Mogford, R.</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>Comparison of air and ground conflict detection and resolution algorithms and their implications</atitle><btitle>Proceedings. The 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference</btitle><stitle>DASC</stitle><date>2002</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>1</volume><spage>2B1</spage><epage>2B1</epage><pages>2B1-2B1</pages><isbn>9780780373679</isbn><isbn>0780373677</isbn><abstract>Decision support tools (DSTs) designed to allow airspace users to maintain separation will become increasingly critical as more direct routes, free maneuvering, self-separation, and distributed air-ground traffic management concepts evolve. One type of DST, conflict detection and resolution (CD&amp;R) tools, will play an important role in air traffic management both on the ground and in the air. A number of aircraft CD&amp;R algorithms have been developed in recent years; however, there is no detailed competitive analysis that clearly demonstrates their effectiveness and efficiency. Kuchar and Yang (1997) surveyed multiple algorithms and documented their strengths, but the impact on the users of these algorithms has not yet been tested in simulated conditions with realistic traffic situations. Most of the studies examining individual algorithm effectiveness use either the fast-time or Monte Carlo process. Therefore, there is a need to examine and compare the effectiveness of these algorithms from a human-centered perspective.</abstract><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/DASC.2002.1067913</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISBN: 9780780373679
ispartof Proceedings. The 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2002, Vol.1, p.2B1-2B1
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_ieee_primary_1067913
source IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings
subjects Air traffic control
Aircraft
Algorithm design and analysis
Fuels
Logic
Monte Carlo methods
NASA
Testing
Timing
Traffic control
title Comparison of air and ground conflict detection and resolution algorithms and their implications
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T17%3A26%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ieee_6IE&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20air%20and%20ground%20conflict%20detection%20and%20resolution%20algorithms%20and%20their%20implications&rft.btitle=Proceedings.%20The%2021st%20Digital%20Avionics%20Systems%20Conference&rft.au=Kopardekar,%20P.&rft.date=2002&rft.volume=1&rft.spage=2B1&rft.epage=2B1&rft.pages=2B1-2B1&rft.isbn=9780780373679&rft.isbn_list=0780373677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/DASC.2002.1067913&rft_dat=%3Cieee_6IE%3E1067913%3C/ieee_6IE%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-ieee_primary_10679133%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=1067913&rfr_iscdi=true