Empirical analysis of aircraft clusters in air traffic situation networks

Abstract

The existing research on air traffic complexity ignores the effects of air traffic situation structure and, thus, cannot reflect the heterogeneous traffic density distribution in airspace. In this study, the structure of air traffic situation was characterized using the idea of community structure in complex networks. An aircraft cluster model was built, and an aircraft cluster discovery method based on depth-first traversal was proposed. The aircraft cluster division effect was comprehensively represented by cluster performance indices, including cohesion and stability. The routinely recorded radar data in two air traffic control sectors were collected to assess the cluster division results. Through statistics, the threshold intervals with 95% of best performance are 40–60 km and 20–50 km for the two sectors, respectively. The value 40 km was selected to further statistically characterize the aircraft clusters. Compared with K-means clustering, the proposed method does not require the predefined number of clusters and has high stability, which confirms its feasibility into cluster division in dynamic air traffic situation. The structural characteristics of aircraft clusters, including the average intra-cluster horizontal distance, number of clusters, and size and life cycle of clusters, were statistically analyzed. Comparison of cluster structures with the commonly used dynamic density index shows that in air traffic situation with relatively large number big size of clusters, the aircraft trajectory changes more frequently. Structural characterization of aircraft clusters is able to portray the nonuniformity of traffic density distribution, and contributes to comprehensive description of air traffic situation, thus providing a new prospect for analysis of air traffic complexity. Moreover, aircraft cluster division contributes to auto-identification of hot-spots on radar screen, and efficiently eliminates the workload imposed on controllers during judgment of these congestion hot-spots, thereby improving the air traffic operation efficiency.

Keywords

Air traffic management air traffic situation complex network community structure aircraft cluster traffic complexity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Sridhar B, Sheth K and Grabbe S. Airspace complexity and its application in air traffic management. In: The 2nd USA/Europe air traffic management R&D seminar, Orlando, FL, USA, 1998.

Loft

. Applying psychological science to examine prospective memory in simulated air traffic control. Curr Direct Psychol Sci 2014; 23: 326–331.

Masalonis A, Callaham M and Wanke C. Dynamic density and complexity metrics for real-time traffic flow management. In: The 5th USA/Europe air traffic management seminar, Budapest, Hungary, 2003.

Fedja

Milan

Vojin

. Developing a generic metric of terminal airspace traffic complexity. Transportmetrica 2011; 7: 369–394.

Bagassi

de Crescenzio

Persiani

. Design and evaluation of a four-dimensional interface for air traffic control. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering 2009; 224: 937–948.

Histon

John

Guillaume

. Introducing structural considerations into complexity metrics. Air Traffic Contr Quart 2002; 10: 115–130.

Mondoloni S and Liang D. Airspace fractal dimension and applications. In: The 4th USA/Europe air traffic management R&D seminar, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 2001.

Puechmorel S. Air traffic complexity: towards intrinsic metrics. In: The 3rd USA/Europe air traffic management R&D seminar, Napoli, Italy, 2000.

Wang

Zhao

Wang

. Evaluation of air traffic control sector complexity. J Transport Syst Eng Inform Technol 2013; 13: 147–153.

10.

Lee

Feron

Peitchett

. Describing airspace complexity: Airspace response to disturbances. J Guid Control Dyn 2009; 32: 210–222.

11.

Delahaye

Puechmorel

Hansman

. Air traffic complexity map based on non linear dynamical systems. Air Traffic Contr Quart 2004; 12: 367–388.

12.

Shayne

Penelope

Andrew

. Modeling and predicting mental workload in en route air traffic control: Critical review and broader implications. Hum Factors 2007; 49: 376–399.

13.

Lamoureux

. The influence of aircraft proximity data on the subjective mental workload of controllers in the air traffic control task. Ergonomics 1999; 42: 1482–1491.

14.

Landry

Lagu

Kinnari

. State-based modeling of continuous human-integrated systems: An application to air traffic separation assurance. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 2010; 95: 345–353.

15.

Ziho K, Ellen JB and Douglas WL. Air traffic controllers’ visual scanning, aircraft selection, and comparison strategies in support of conflict detection. In: 58th annual meeting on proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society, Chicago, USA, 2014.

16.

Barabasi

. Scale-free networks: A decade and beyond. Science 2009; 325: 412–413.

17.

Boccaletti

Latora

Moreno

. Complex networks: Structure and dynamics. Phys Rep 2006; 424: 175–308.

18.

Newman

MEJ

. Detecting community structure in networks. Eur Phys J B 2004; 38: 321–330.

19.

Wang

Wen

Zhao

. Analysis of topological characteristics in air traffic situation networks. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering 2015; 229: 2497–2505.

20.

Fan

Zhang

. Accuracy and precision of methods for community identification in weighted networks. Physica A 2007; 377: 363–372.

21.

Liang

. Sneak circuit partition analysis method based on graph theory. J Beijing Univ Aeronaut Astronaut 2014; 40: 115–119.

22.

Bilimoria KD and Jastrzebski M. Properties of aircraft clusters in the national airspace system. In: The 6th AIAA aviation technology, integration and operations Conference, Wichita, KS, USA, 2006.

23.

Ordonez

Omiecinski

. Efficient disk-based K-means clustering for relational databases. IEEE Trans Know Data Eng 2004; 16: 909–921.