Complexity Science Applications to Dynamic Trajectory Management: Research Strategies

The promise of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is strongly tied to the concept of trajectory-based operations in the national airspace system. Existing efforts to develop trajectory management concepts are largely focused on individual trajectories, optimized independently, then de-conflicted among each other, and individually re-optimized, as possible. The benefits in capacity, fuel, and time are valuable, though perhaps could be greater through alternative strategies. The concept of agent-based trajectories offers a strategy for automation of simultaneous multiple trajectory management. The anticipated result of the strategy would be dynamic management of multiple trajectories with interacting and interdependent outcomes that satisfy multiple, conflicting constraints. These constraints would include the business case for operators, the capacity case for the Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP), and the environmental case for noise and emissions. The benefits in capacity, fuel, and time might be improved over those possible under individual trajectory management approaches. The proposed approach relies on computational agent-based modeling (ABM), combinatorial mathematics, as well as application of “traffic physics” concepts to the challenge, and modeling and simulation capabilities. The proposed strategy could support transforming air traffic control from managing individual aircraft behaviors to managing systemic behavior of air traffic in the NAS. A system built on the approach could provide the ability to know when regions of airspace approach being “full,” that is, having non-viable local solution space for optimizing trajectories in advance.

[1]  J. A. Walker,et al.  The general problem of the stability of motion , 1994 .

[2]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[3]  A. Pentland,et al.  Collective intelligence , 2006, IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag..

[4]  David B. Fogel,et al.  Computational Intelligence: The Experts Speak , 2003 .

[5]  D. Helbing Traffic and related self-driven many-particle systems , 2000, cond-mat/0012229.

[6]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[7]  Daniel Delahaye,et al.  Distributed Trajectory Flexibility Preservation for Traffic Complexity Mitigation , 2009 .

[8]  G. Weinberg An Introduction to General Systems Thinking , 1975 .

[9]  Norbert Wiener,et al.  Cybernetics. , 1948, Scientific American.

[10]  Marc Mézard,et al.  Landscape of solutions in constraint satisfaction problems , 2005, Physical review letters.

[11]  Bruce J. Holmes,et al.  Transportation Network Topologies , 2004 .

[12]  Craig W. Reynolds Flocks, herds, and schools: a distributed behavioral model , 1987, SIGGRAPH.

[13]  Hal R. Varian,et al.  Economic Mechanism Design for Computerized Agents , 1995, USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce.

[14]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Micro- and macro-simulation of freeway traffic , 2002 .

[15]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Algorithmic Mechanism Design , 2001, Games Econ. Behav..

[16]  Ludwig von Bertalanffy,et al.  General System Theory , 1969 .

[17]  Norbert Wiener,et al.  Cybernetics, Second Edition: or the Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine , 1965 .

[18]  S Kirkpatrick,et al.  Critical Behavior in the Satisfiability of Random Boolean Expressions , 1994, Science.

[19]  Stephen Budiansky THE PHYSICS OF GRIDLOCK. , 2000 .

[20]  Ron Lavi,et al.  Algorithmic Mechanism Design , 2008, Encyclopedia of Algorithms.

[21]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  The origins of order , 1993 .

[22]  John L. Tocher,et al.  Benefits of optimal flight plans , 1996, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

[23]  M. Mitchell Waldrop,et al.  Complexity : the emerging science and the edge of order and chaos , 1992 .