EXPLORATION OF ADVANCED TECHNIQUES FOR nas CONTROLLER MODELING Copy eight © 1997 Bruce Lavan Rosenber F oles °F hpwil 1198 [A BRIEF HISTORY OF SYSTEM DESIGN, MODELING AND STMULATIO: six major Periods of approaches to design can be identified based on available hardware and on the method of applying the hardware. ‘They are: 1. Before Analog Computers (1940 to 1950), 2. analog Computers running Diff Equations (DE's) (1950 to 1970), 3. Digital Computers, numeric solution of DE's (1960 to present), 4, Digital Computers, discrete event sim (1965 to present), 5. Digital Computers, expert systems (1975 to present), and 6. Digital Computers, soft computing (1985 to present). Period 1 was characterized by use of closed-form algebraic solutions to sets of differential equations. Linear differential equations were solved using LaPlace transforms and graphical techniques. Pole-Zero, root-locus, and Bode plots were used to predict system stability and performance. When the design was worked out on paper, an actual engineering model was built and tested to confirm the design. No dynamic simulations were done. Period 1 also represents the period when queuing theory wa: developed to handle complex systems which involve users and servers. Closed-form algebraic solutions were developed using various statistical distributions (Poisson, hypergeometric, etc.) period 2 used the techniques of Period 1 but added the capability of wiring the set of differential equations (the system's mathematical model) on an analog computer. A limited number of nonlinear effects could be dynamically simulated with zener diodes, time-delaying tape recorders, etc; but the major emphasis was on linear differential equations. With an analog computer, ‘the designer could vary system parameters by turning knobs and monitor the system behavior on a multi-channel recorder or oscilloscope. tn Period 3, differential equations were changed to difference equations and solved using numerical techniques on a digital computer. During the early part of this Period most digital computers were used in the batch mode, so there was no interactive design which was possible using analog computers. with remote terminals and then personal computers, interactive dynamic simulations became possible. tn Period 4, digital computers began to be used for discrete event simulations. A discrete event simulation can use a descriptive (nonmathematical) model of the system. It is therefore free to model much more complex, nonlinear systems with multiple inputs and outputs. SIMSCRIPT and GPSS were early languages for programming discrete event simulations (Gordon, 1969, 2nd Ba 1978) Standard, "hard", or "crisp" discrete event simulations typically use Boolean (not fuzzy) logic. Also, they tend not to be adaptive or self-optimizing. Page 1.Period 5 used digital computers to represent expert knowledge. Knowledge bases were collected and entered into computer structures which permitted the computer to draw conclusions and make recommendations. The standard expert system has been called "brittle" because incomplete input data can lead to incorrect or to no conclusions. This brittleness was due to the use of IF- ‘Then rules with crisp Boolean (not fuzzy) logic. Period 6, which I call “soft computing" (see Zadeh, 1994), is characterized by the use of advanced techniques. Artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, fuzzy cognitive maps (FCM), genetic algorithms, automata theory are all areas which have burgeoned since 1985. Kosko (1992) presents an excellent theoretical view of many of these new techniques. These techniques combined with those from Periods 4 and 5 can overcome the limitations of these earlier approaches. The new techniques produce applications which can be more robust, self-optimizing, and adaptive. Despite sometimes excessive hyperbole over some of these "new" techniques, they all had precursors from which they evolved. For instance, factor analysis permits the recognition of patterns in data, i.e., which variables tend to be related to each other. Factor analysis, which originated in 1931 (Thurstone, 1931, 1947) uses linear correlation techniques. Neural networks "recognize" patterns in a similar fashion to factor analysis but the neural network handles nonlinear relationships. Mr. Rosenberg has applied factor analysis in three major studies: (Maurer et al, 1982), (Rosenberg and Landis, 1968), and (Rosenberg and Silver, 1968). The study reported in (Landis, Silver and Jones, 1967) used multidimensional viewpoint analysis, which is similar to factor analysis, to determine how controllers perceived different air traffic situations. ‘The major innovations of Period 6, neural nets, fuzzy logic, and genetic algorithms have all been used in related manners. Kosko showed that neural nets could be used to determine the optimum fuzzy scale categories. He also showed that the weights on the nodes in the hidden layer of a net are analogous to fuzzy categories. In addition, these nodal weights can also be interpreted as high order “concepts” or "patterns" which appear as factors in a multiple factor analysis. Further, genetic algorithms have been used to find the optimum number of hidden layers in a neural net and the optimum numbers of nodes within the hidden layers. SOFT COMPUTING AND THE AIR TRAFFIC GROUND CONTROLLER MODEL Gauch (1993) points out that one of the beneficial uses of a model is the reduction of noise in the data. A model, whether a differential equation, a written description, or a computer program provides information on what the expected behavior of the system will be. Real world data often imposes impossible loads Page 2.on the capability of digital computers. One criticism of Period 6 innovations is that many of them work only on "toy" problems. Gauch (1992) provides a solution to the target tracking problem (modeling or predicting future path and position of thousands of targets, certainly not a toy problem) with a clever Period 4 algorithm. Clymer et al (1992) describe an approach to modeling airport air traffic control which utilizes many of the new techniques from Period 6. Clymer (1990) and Corey and Clymer (1991) describe the OpEM design method which they state facilitates the design of a descriptive descrete event simulation model. Harrison et al (1994), in an FAATC sponsored effort, provide an overview of aviation-related artificial intelligence approaches for the above Periods 4, 5, and 6. A wide range of methods are described. It is likely that in future, what we see as innovations will develop into standard approaches, without the special labels and hype. We will explore the approach taken by Clymer et al (1992) and other advanced Period 6 techniques for designing the controller capacity model. Considerations of compatibility with existing airport capacity models, of ease of identifying and establishing parameter values, practicability, and ability to handle "real" (as opposed to "toy") problems will be central to our effort. REFERENCES Clymer, J. R., Corey, P. D., and Gardner, J. A., Discrete Event Fuzzy Airport Control, pp. 343 IEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 22, No. 2, March/April 1992. Clymer, J. R., System Design Using OpEM Inductive/Adaptive Expert System Controller, in IASTED Int. J. Modeling Simulation, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 129-136, 1990. corey, P. D., and Clymer, J. R., Discrete Event Simulation of Object Movement and Interactions, in Simulation, San Diego, CA, The Society of Computer Simulation International, Vol 56, No. 3, pp. 167-174, Mar. 1991. Gauch, H. G. Jr., Prediction, Pasimony and Noise, American Scientist, Vol. 81, pp. 468-474, Sep.-Oct. 1993. Gordon, G., System Simulation, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood cliffs, NJ, 1969 (2nd Bd, 1978). Harrison, L., Saunders, P., and Janowitz, J., Artificial Intelligence with Applications for Aircraft, Final Report No. Dor/FAA/CT-94/41, FAA Technical Center, August 1994. Page 3.