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&...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
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&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.</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&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.</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&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.</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 |