IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

Fo
rP
ee
rR

Defending a circular target with a slower defender equipped

with threat radius
ev

Journal: IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

iew

Manuscript ID JAS-2024-0463

Manuscript Type: Letter

Keywords: Autonomous underwater vehicle, Agents, USV, Game

Navigation，Guidance, and Control Technologies of Marine Systems <

Specialty/Area of Expertise:
Navigation，Guidance and Control

Note: The following files were submitted by the author for peer review, but cannot be converted to PDF.
You must view these files (e.g. movies) online.

JAS-2022-0581R2.tex
IEEEtran.cls
Page 1 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica
1

1
2 1st Conference & Special Session 5
3 avoid being threatened by the latter. When the distance between the
4 Defending a circular target with a slower defender
equipped with threat radius
5
Dear Editor,
6 intruder be denoted as PD = [xD , yD ]T ∈ R2 and PI = [xI , yI ]T ∈
7 This letter discusses the issue of guarding a circular target, where
8 a defender equipped with a threat radius attempts to intercept the
superior intruder. By placing the defender at the target boundary, we
9 obtain the winning conditions for both the intruder and the defender.
10 Meanwhile, by defining the initial position space of the intruder as
11 the configuration space, we provide the winning zones for both sides.
12
It is shown via some numerical examples that the winning conditions
and winning zones determined by the proposed method are correct.
13 These years have witnessed the tremendous development of the
research on target defense problems in various engineering fields
14 [1]–[3]. Wang et al. [4] study the problem of using a faster defender
15 to protect the target. The proposed geometric method considers the
16 obstructive effect of the target on the defender’s movement and
provides the winning conditions for both sides. Fu et al. [5] provide
17 an isochron-based solution to the problem of intercepting an intruder
18 by two slower defenders. When there are enough defenders, capturing
19 the intruder is also a way to protect the target [6]. In Ref [7], Francos
et al. study the problem of multiple defenders intercepting multiple
Fo
20 intruders and provide the speed conditions for defenders to win.
21 Pursuit-evasion game [8] is another common agents confrontation
22 problem that can be transformed into target defense problem, and
the research methods of the two can be mutually referenced.
23
rP
radius Rs , aims to prevent the intruder from reaching Γ. The intruder
should maintain a distance of no less than Rs from the defender to
intruder and the target is equal to ra , the intruder successfully invades
the target. ra is the attack radius of the intruder, and it is also a very
small value. Let the cartesian coordinates of the defender and the
R2 , respectively. The initial positions of the players are permissible
if the defender is constrained in ∂Γ and the intruder lies within the
region Ω \ Γ.
The agents have the following kinetics:
[ẋD , ẏD ]T = vD [cos φD , sin φD ]T , (1a)
[ẋI , ẏI ]T = vI [cos φI , sin φI ]T , (1b)
where vD (resp., vI ) denotes the speed of the defender (resp., the
intruder); φD and φI are the respective course control inputs of the
defender and the intruder. PD (0) = [xD (0), yD (0)]T ∈ ∂Γ and
PI (0) = [xI (0), yI (0)]T ∈ Ω denote the initial positions of agents,
respectively. The speed of each agent remains constant. To make this
game nontrivial, it is assumed that vD > vI . The target region can
be given by
n o
Γ = [x, y]T ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 ≤ Rt2 . (2)
Assumption 1:
p
(xD (0) − xI (0))2 + (yD (0) − yI (0))2 ≥ Rs
should be satisfied, which means that the intruder is not threatened
by the defender in the initial stage.
Assumption 2: The defender is initially located at the target

The above research focuses on differential games, geometric anal- boundary and can only move along the target boundary. PD (0) =
24 ysis, and task allocation. In addition, with the rise and development [xD (0), yD (0)]T = [Rt , 0]T means that the X-axis points from the
25 of artificial intelligence, applying intelligent algorithms such as re- origin to the initial position of the defender.
inforcement learning to research on target-defense or pursuit-evasion Due to symmetry, we first assume that the intruder is located on
26
ee

problem is also a popular direction [3], [9], [10]. the X-axis or above it.
27 However, regardless of the research method used, researchers either Theorem 1: Once vD
≥ √ v2I 2 when
assume that defenders have an advantage in speed or in quantity. It is Rt
28 very difficult to intercept a superior intruder using one single slower
p xI +yI
(xI − xD ) + (yI − yD ) = Rs , the defender can win the
2 2
29 defender. In Ref [11], the defender with a capture radius greater than game no matter how the intruder moves; Once vRDt < √ v2I 2
rR

30 0 delays the entering permanently by rotating around the target area
at a sufficiently large angular speed. Zhou et al. [12] consider the
31 capture radius and explore the possibility of the intruder entering the
32 target area from the perspective of pursuit-evasion games. The above
p xI +yI
when (xI − xD )2 + (yI − yD )2 = Rs , the intruder at point
[xI , yI ] can set the minimum distance between itself and the target
to max(Rs − 2Rt , 0) as long as it chooses the bypass strategy. The
ev

33 research provides us with new ideas for studying the target-defense stategy can be described using (3).
problem by slow defenders.
34 To address the dilemma, we have equipped the defender with a θ =α+ −λ
π
(3a)
35 threat radius, which can be considered as the defender’s weapon 2
−vD cos θ
36 range. Although faster intruders can try to bypass the defender’s
iew

ϕ = arccos( ) (3b)
weapon range, the presence of a threat radius can provide a certain vI
37 advantage for the defender. Under this setting, we analyze the actual φI = π + λ − ϕ (3c)
38 performance of the defender in completing target escort task.
In brief, the contribution of this work is two-fold: 1) Determining Here α is the azimuth of the defender on the target boundary; λ is
39 the conditions for both sides to win based on the relationship between the line of sight angle of the intruder relative to the defender; ϕ and
40 agent’s speed, target radius, and threat radius; 2) Dividing the initial θ respectively represent the angle between the velocity direction of
41 configuration space (the position of the intruder when the defender’s the agent and the line of sight.
position is fixed) into winning zones for both sides.
42 Notation: Throughout the paper, Ω ∈ R2 represents the combat area
43 that includes the target and all agents; Γ ∈ Ω is the target area and
44 ∂Γ is the boundary of the target area.
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52 (a) Relative motion of agents (b) The motion trajectories
53 Fig. 2. Illustration showing the movement of agents.
54
55 Fig. 1. Illustration of the present two-player target defense problem. Proof. From Fig. 2a, we can derive the relative motion equations
of the agents.
56 Problem Statement: As shown in Fig. 1, a two-agent target defense
57 frame is established, which is composed of a target Γ with center d˙ = −vI cos ϕ − vD cos θ (4a)
58 coordinates [0, 0]T and radius Rt , and two opponent agents, i.e., the 1
λ̇ = (vI sin ϕ − vD sin θ) (4b)
59 defender D, and the intruder I. The defender, equipped with a threat d
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 2 of 15
2

1
2 Here d is the distance between the intruder and the defender. Winning conditions: Here we introduce the game results under
When ϕ = arccos( −vDvIcos θ ), we know that d˙ = 0 and d = Rs different parameters. Let Rs1 = vvID Rt
− Rt , Rs2 = 2Rt and
3 always hold. The intruder can guarantee that it will never be vI Rt
4 Rs3 = vD + Rt . Combined with the above analysis, we have
threatened by the defender. Set ∠PI OPD = β − α. Since
the following results.
5 vD ˙ D = β̇ − α̇ = √ vI
< √ v2I 2 , ∠PI OP − vRDt > 0, and
Rt xI +yI 2 2 xI +yI 1. If Rs1 > Rs2 , that is, vvDI > 3:
6 ∠PI OPD will gradually increase under this strategy. In 4PI OPD , vI
a. When Rs < Rs2 , R > vRDt and Rtv+R I
> vRDt . The intruder
7 Rs
sin ∠PI OPD
Rt
= sin ∠OP I PD
, which means that ∠OPI PD will also t s
can win the game regardless of its position;
8 increase. Therefore, ∠OPD PI = 2π − ∠OPI PD − ∠PI OPD will
b. When Rs2 ≤ Rs < Rs1 , Rsv−R I
> vRDt and Rtv+R I
> vRDt . The
decrease. According to the law of cosines, we can calculate kOPI k =
9 q t
intruder can set the minimum distance between itself and the target
s

10 kOPD k2 + kPI PD k2 − 2 kOPD k kPI PD k cos ∠OPD PI = to Rs − 2Rt regardless of its position;
p
11 2
Rt + Rs − 2Rt Rs cos ∠OPD PI . As Rs and Rt are fixed values,
2 c. When Rs1 ≤ Rs < Rs3 , Rsv−R I
t
> vRDt and Rtv+R I
s
≤ vRDt . The
12 kOPI k will decrease as ∠OPD PI increases. Correspondingly, the intruder have only one chance to set the minimum distance between
value of kOPI k − Rt will decrease, indicating that the intruder will itself and the target to Rs − 2Rt with a suitable location. Regardless
13 gradually approach the target. When vRDt ≥ √ v2I 2 , the defender of the intruder’s position, the distance between the intruder and the
xI +yI
14 can keep ∠PI OPD unchanged or make it gradually converge to 0. defender will be equal to Rs finally;
15 The intruder does not have the ability to reduce his distance from d. When Rs ≥ Rs3 , Rsv−R I
t
≤ vRDt and Rtv+RI
s
< vRDt . The intruder
16 the target. So far, we have completed the proof of Theorem 1. can only set the minimum distance between itself and the target to a
Theorem 2: Once vRDt < Rtv+R I
, the intruder can set the minimum value greater than Rs − 2Rt . When the system is in a stable state,
17 s
distance between itself and the target to max(Rs −2Rt , 0) regardless the distance between the intruder and the defender will be equal to
18 of its position. Rs ≤ 2Rt should be satisfied to ensure that the Rs regardless of the intruder’s position.
19 theoretical minimum distance between the intruder and the target is 2. If Rs1 ≤ Rs2 , that is, vvDI ≤ 3:
Fo
0 if the intruder wants to win the game.
20 No matter where the intruder is located, it only needs to move
e. When Rs < Rs1 , R vI
t
> vRDt and Rtv+R I
s
> vRDt . The intruder
21 towards the target and adopt a bypass strategy after encountering the can win the game regardless of its position;
vI
22 defender. The proof of this theorem is similar to Theorem 1 and will f. When Rs1 ≤ Rs < Rs2 , R t
> vRDt and Rtv+R I
s
≤ vRDt . The
not be repeated here. intruder can win the game with a suitable location;
23
rP

Remark 1: Although the defender will win when vRDt = √ v2I 2 g. When Rs2 ≤ Rs < Rs3 , Rsv−R I
> vRDt and Rtv+R I
< vRDt . The
24 p xI +yI
result is consistent with 1.c;
t s
and (xI − xD )2 + (yI − yD )2 = Rs , this is an unstable ideal
25 state. After receiving minor disturbances, the system either transitions h. When Rs ≥ Rs3 , Rsv−R I
< vRDt and Rtv+R I
≤ vRDt . The result
26 to a stable state where vRDt > √ v2I 2 with x2I + yI2 ≥ Rt + Rs
t s
p
is consistent with 1.d.
ee

27 xI +yI
or transitions to a state where the intruder wins. Winning zones: Only when Rs1 < Rs < Rs2 , we need to divide
28 Agents’ trajectories: With the above analysis, we can also determine the winning zones. Because in other cases, the entire configuration
space is either the defender’s winning zone or the intruder’s winning
29 the trajectories of both parties by solving (5) when the intruder keeps
zone.
rR

approaching the target while maintaining a distance of Rs from the

30 defender and the defender moves along the circle with φD = λ+θ = Assuming the defender is located at [Rt , 0]T and the in-
31 α + π2 . truder is at [Rt + Rs cos p λ0 , Rs sin λ0 ]T initially, we can get
32
p
vD x + yI = kOPI (0)k = Rt2 + Rs2 − 2Rt Rs cos(π − λ0 ). Let
2 2
α= t (5a) vD I
= kOPvII(0)k and we can get a suitable λ∗0 . According to Theorem
ev

33 Rt Rt
1, we found that when λ0 > λ∗0 , vRDt < kOPvII(0)k and the intruder
34 ϕ = arccos(
−vD cos θ
) (5b) can win the game; When λ0 ≤ λ∗0 , vRDt ≥ kOPvII(0)k and the defender
35 vI
1 can win the game.
36
iew

λ̇ = (vI sin ϕ − vD sin θ) (5c) The position of the defender after moving around the target
d
37 π boundary for a period of time t is [Rt cos vRDtt , Rt sin vRDtt ]T . So let’s
2π = π − α + λ + θ + (5d)
38 2 draw a circle with [Rt cos vRDtt + Rs cos( vRDtt + λ∗0 ), Rt sin vRDtt +
39 Here t ∈ [0, tI ] is the current time and tI is the entire invasion time; Rs sin( vRDtt + λ∗0 )]T as the center and vI t as the radius. The points
40 α is the central angle that the defender turns around the target during inside the circle correspond to the winning positions for the intruder.
t.
41 By solving (5), we can get a differential equation (6) of λ with
By drawing the circles corresponding to different values of t, we can
obtain the winning zone for the intruder. When the intruder is located
42 respect to t. in its winning zone, it can successfully invade the target through
43 r v
2 sin2 (−λ+ D t)
vD
maneuvering.
R vD
44 vI 1− vI2
t
− vD cos(−λ + Rt
t) However, due to obstruction, the intruder cannot directly reach the
λ̇ = appropriate location from certain points. Therefore, we consider a
45 Rs
(6)
simple reverse prediction method to obtain the boundary between the
46 We define γ = arccos 2R Rs
, which is the angle between the vector winning zones. The position of the defender after moving around the
47 t
PD PI and the vector PD O when kOPI k = Rt . If λ satisfies 2π = target boundary for a period of time t is [Rt cos vRDtt , Rt sin vRDtt ]T .
48 π − α + λ + γ, the invasion is over and we can get the invasion When the intruder can reach a corresponding point [Rt cos vRDtt +
49 time tI . The trajectories of the agents determined by (5) and (6) can Rs cos( vRDtt + λ∗0 ), Rt sin vRDtt + Rs sin( vRDtt + λ∗0 )]T faster, it can
be described in (7). Fig. 2b shows the movement trajectories of both
50 opposing sides when the intruder can attack the target.
bypass the defender and successfully invade the target. Let x̃(t) =
Rt cos vRDtt + Rs cos( vRDtt + λ∗0 ), ỹ(t) = Rt sin vRDtt + Rs sin( vRDtt +
51 vD t
xD (t) = Rt cos , λ∗0 ). We define a circle O in (8). The intruder moving on this circle
52 Rt
(7a)
can maintain the same angular velocity as the defender.
53 vD t  
yD (t) = Rt sin , (7b) 2πRt
54 Rt O = [x̃(t), ỹ(t)]T ∈ R2 : 0 ≤ t ≤ (8)
vD
55 xI (t) = Rt cos
vD t
+ Rs cos λ(t), (7c)
56 Rt After the defender has been moving along the target boundary for
vD t a period of time, there is a point on circle (8) that corresponds to
57 yI (t) = Rt sin + Rs sin λ(t), (7d) the current position of the defender. Assuming that the intruder starts
Rt
58 vD tI
from this point and moves along the tangent direction of the circle
59 where λ(t) ∈ [λ0 , π + Rt
− γ] is the solution to (6). for time t, we can obtain a point on the winning zone boundary. We
60
Page 3 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica
3

1
2 define L in (9) as the boundary between the winning zones.
3
(
ỹ(t)
4 L = [x(t), y(t)]T ∈ R2 : x(t) = x̃(t) + p vI t,
x̃2 (t) + ỹ 2 (t)
5 )
6 x̃(t) 2πRt
y(t) = ỹ(t) − p vI t, 0 ≤ t ≤
7 x̃2 (t) + ỹ 2 (t) vD
(9)
8
9 Numerical example: The parameters are listed in Table 1. The
defender is initially located at [Rt , 0]T . The maximum simulation
10 time is 100s.
11
TABLE I
12 T HE PARAMETERS CORRESPONDING TO DIFFERENT CONDITIONS .
13
14 Parameter Rt vD Rs vI ra PI (0)
15 Value 10 1 15 2 0.1 [0, 18] ,[0, 30] ,[0, 41.68]T ,[0, 45]T
T T

16 Fig. 4. The trajectories of the agents under different conditions.

17 Since Rs1 = 10 < Rs = 15 < Rs2 = 20, we need to divide
18 the winning zones. Considering the symmetry of the target and the
19 presence of the defender’s threat radius, we provide the winning zones
based on the previous analysis in Fig. 3. The zone Z4 represents the
Fo
20 sets of positions where the intruder is initially prohibited from being
21 located due to the presence of threat radius. When the intruder is
initially located in Z3 , it can directly invade the target and choose a
22 bypass strategy when encountering the defender. The intruder initially (a) (b) (c) (d)
23
rP
located within Z2 needs to move along the direction tangent to circle Fig. 5. The distance between I, D, and Γ.
24 O, and then execute a similar strategy as when located within Z3 .
Z3 ∪ Z2 represents the intruder’s winning zone. As for Z1 , it is the
25 winning zone for the defender. The defender can prevent the intruder We have only presented simulation results under certain conditions
26 located in that area from attacking the target, regardless of how the (2.f) here. The simulation we conducted privately has proven that
ee

27 latter maneuvers. The green boundary line between Z3 and Z2 is the analysis under other conditions is also correct. Due to space
derived from (9). There are four different intruders (the red solid limitations, we won’t discuss it too much in this letter.
28 circles) set up in the Fig. 3, each located in different zones. Conclusion: This letter discusses the circular target defense problem,
29 where a defender attempts to protect the target from attacks by a
rR

30 superior intruder. Firstly, we obtain the winning conditions for game

participants based on analysis. Afterwards, we establish the winning
31 zones for both sides based on the conditions. Finally, some numerical
32 examples verify the correctness of the analysis in this letter. When the
intruder is more concerned about the invasion time, it may have some
ev

33 better invasion strategies. Future work will focus on time optimal

34 intrusion strategy.
35
36
iew

R EFERENCES
37
[1] S. Velhal, S. Sundaram and N. Sundararajan, “A decentralized multirobot
38 spatiotemporal multitask assignment approach for perimeter defense,”
39 IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 3085-3096, Oct.
2022.
40 [2] B. Tong and H. Duan, “A game theory-based approach for multiple
UAVs cooperative target defense,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and
41 Systems II: Express Briefs, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 2149-2153, April 2024.
42 Fig. 3. Winning zones of the agents. The blue solid circle represents the [3] S. Sun, D. Cai, H.-T. Zhang, and N. Xing, “Reinforcement learning-
based MAS interception in antagonistic environments,” IEEE/CAA J.
initial position of the defender.
43 Autom. Sinica, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 270–272, Jan. 2024.
[4] K. Wang, S. Zhou, Y. Yao, Q. Sun, and Y. Wang, “A target defence-
44 In trajectory testing simulation, the defender tries to align with the intrusion game with considering the obstructive effect of target,” IET
45 intruder as much as possible. I2 , I3 and I4 are located outside the Control Theory Appl, pp. 1–15, 2024.
[5] H. Fu and H. H. . -T. Liu, “An Isochron-Based Solution to the Target
46 circle O in the initial stage. They can first move in the direction Defense Game Against a Faster Invader,” IEEE Control Systems Letters,
tangent to the circle. When the intruder is located on or inside vol. 6, pp. 1352-1357, 2022.
47 the circle just like I1 , the intruder adopts an improved artificial [6] A. Bono, L. D’Alfonso, G. Fedele, and V. Gazi, “Target capturing in an
48 potential field invasion method, which can comprehensively balance ellipsoidal region for a swarm of double integrator agents,” IEEE/CAA
the attraction of the target and the repulsion of the defender to the J. Autom. Sinica, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 801–811, May 2022.
49 intruder. Fig. 4 displays the trajectories. The solid red (blue) line [7] R. M. Francos, A. M. Bruckstein, “Defense against smart invaders with
50 represents the intruder’s (defender’s) trajectory; The red (blue) hollow
swarms of sweeping agents,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol.
173, pp. 104620, 2024.
51 circle represents the final position of the intruder (defender). I1 and [8] N. Chen, L. Li, and W. Mao, “Equilibrium strategy of the pursuit-
I2 located in the winning zone of the intruder can successfully invade evasion game in three-dimensional space,” IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sinica,
52 the target, while I3 located on the boundary and I4 located in the vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 446–458, Feb. 2024.
53 winning zone of the defender cannot successfully invade the target. [9] L. Wang, M. Wang, and T. Yue, “A fuzzy deterministic policy gradient
algorithm for pursuit-evasion differential games,” Neurocomputing, vol
54 We present the distance variation curve between game participants 362, pp. 106-117, 2019.
in Fig. 5. In all four tests, the distance between the intruder and the [10] Y. Wang, L. Dong, and C. Sun, “Cooperative control for multi-player
55 defender is always greater than Rs = 15. In Fig. 5a and 5b, the pursuit-evasion games with reinforcement learning,” Neurocomputing,
56 intruder can successfully invade the target, so the distance between vol 412, pp. 101-114, 2020.
[11] H. Fu and H. H. . -T. Liu, “Defending a Target Area With a Slower
57 the intruder and the target will converge to 0. In Fig. 5c and 5d, Defender,” IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 7, pp. 661-666, 2023.
the intruder ultimately maintains concentric circular motion with the [12] S. Zhou, H. Li, K. Wang, P. Huang, and C. Sun, “Winning conditions for
58 defender, and the distance from the target is equal to the distance evading into a circular region with speed advantage,” Asian J. Control,
59 from the defender. This is a stable motion mode. pp. 1–12, 2024.
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 4 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38 411x381mm (59 x 59 DPI)
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 5 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38 411x381mm (59 x 59 DPI)
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 6 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
601x601mm (38 x 38 DPI)
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 7 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 8 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 9 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 10 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 11 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 12 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 13 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica Page 14 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Page 15 of 15 IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Fo
20
21
22
23
rP

24
25
26
ee

27
28
29
rR

30
31
32
561x421mm (38 x 38 DPI)
ev

33
34
35
36
iew

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60