Countering Drone Swarms with Graph Intelligence: From Bellman–Ford to Near-Linear SSSP

Counter-Swarm Defense as a Fast, Repeated Shortest-Path Problem

Gun Machines or Artillery vs. Swarm Drones: Think in Graphs, Not Gadgets

A high-level, non-operational framing: treat the air–ground fight as a dynamic shortest-path labeling problem on a time-expanded directed graph.

Bellman–Ford Dijkstra Near-Linear SSSP Time-Expanded Graphs Frontier Shrinking

1) Model the Battlespace as a Graph

Represent the battlespace with a time-expanded directed graph. Nodes capture sensor tracks, predicted drone waypoints, defended assets, batteries, and discrete intercept windows—space–time points where an effect could meet a target. Edges encode feasible temporal transitions under drone kinematics, terrain/line-of-sight, and communication relays. Edge costs are multi-objective: expected damage if un-intercepted, time-to-impact, effector kill probability, collateral/EMCON penalties, reload/thermal limits, and comms latency/risk. This provides a unified substrate for risk-aware routing and allocation without weapon-specific detail.

2) Why BF, Dijkstra, and the New SSSP Matter

Bellman–Ford tolerates arbitrary directed graphs and negative penalties (but not negative time), aligning well with time-expanded layers where many edges share timestamps. Its bulk relaxations naturally support rapid re-labeling when the picture changes (jamming, decoys). Dijkstra excels for static, non-negative costs, but the globally sorted frontier (priority queue) becomes the bottleneck at swarm scale. The new “sorting-barrier–breaking” SSSP blends BF-style bulk relaxations with frontier shrinking to converge near-linearly, avoiding heavy sorting while thousands of tracks and intercept windows appear or vanish each second.

3) Practical Pipeline (Defense-Oriented, Abstract)

Ingest & Fuse Radar / EO / ESM / U-space → time-expanded graph (0…T s) Near-Linear SSSP Frontier-shrinking bulk relaxations Risk-to-asset / cost-to-intercept labels Backtrack Paths Enumerate feasible intercept windows Per target with confidence Assign Effectors Min-cost assignment / flow Ammo / thermal / comms limits Close the Loop Incremental BF-style relaxations on changes Horizon staggering (MPC) with label re-use Sharding & Meshing Sectors / altitude bands Adaptive refinement near assets

Run the new SSSP to label each node with minimum “risk-to-asset” or “cost-to-intercept”. Backtrack shortest-cost paths to list viable intercept windows per track. Solve a min-cost assignment/flow over these candidates, using the SSSP labels as potentials, honoring ammo, thermal, and comms limits. When the graph changes—new tracks, spoofed targets, or link loss—apply incremental BF-style relaxations instead of full re-sorting. Roll the horizon forward in MPC fashion; re-use labels and partially relax to keep latency low.

4) Where Each Algorithm Fits

BF-style relaxations handle frequent reweights from EW effects or decoys and tolerate non-“nice” constraints. Dijkstra remains useful for stable local subproblems with fixed, non-negative costs (e.g., internal base logistics). The near-linear SSSP is the main engine for global deconfliction at swarm scale, where priority-queue sorting would choke.

5) Key Design Choices (Abstract, Not Tactical)

Cost shaping: encode asset criticality, blue-force exposure, and comms risk in edge weights; avoid negative cycles. Time expansion: keep coarse grids globally and refine adaptively near defended assets. Resilience: with jammed/noisy inputs, prefer batch relaxations and bounded-subgraph updates over global reorders. Scalability: shard by sector/altitude band; run SSSP per shard and stitch with lightweight inter-shard edges.

6) Outputs That Matter

Sets of feasible intercept windows per drone with confidence estimates, an assignment plan minimizing expected loss under practical limits, and sensitivity views showing how plans shift if a battery is denied or a track proves to be a decoy.

Bottom Line

Treat counter-swarm defense as repeated shortest-path labeling on a time-expanded, directed graph. Use BF-style relaxations for rapid, incremental updates, avoid global sorting overhead, and exploit near-linear SSSP to keep pace with swarm-scale dynamics—without delving into weapon-specific or targeting details.

Ethical note: this article offers an abstract computational framing only and avoids operational guidance.

Counter-Swarm Graph Pipeline (Educational Demo) — Python Script Overview

Counter-Swarm Graph Pipeline (Educational Demo)

Python 3 Graphs Bellman–Ford Dijkstra Delta-Stepping

This Python script is an educational, non-operational simulator that frames counter-swarm planning as a time-expanded directed graph. It uses synthetic data to explore how classic and modern single-source shortest-path (SSSP) algorithms can label low-cost engagement opportunities without providing tactical or weapon-specific guidance.

What the Script Does

  • Scenario generation: Creates synthetic drone tracks (moving upper→lower area) and fixed defensive batteries.
  • Time-expanded graph: Nodes encode drones, batteries, and asset states across discrete times; edges model motion or abstract intercepts.
  • Cost shaping: Edge costs combine factors like time-to-impact, probability-of-kill proxy, collateral, comms latency, reload/thermal limits, and jamming risk.
  • SSSP solvers: Choose Bellman–Ford, Dijkstra, or bucketed Delta-Stepping to compute lowest-label costs through time.
  • Intercept enumeration & assignment: Extract feasible “intercept windows” per track and run a simple min-cost, ammo/cooldown-aware selector.
  • Readable plan output: Lists chosen battery→track matches with times, plus nodes/edges, runtime, and total labeled cost.

How It Works (Pipeline)

  1. Build a time grid over the horizon [0..T] with step dt.
  2. Place nodes for every drone state, battery, and asset at each time slice.
  3. Add motion edges (track→track) and feasible intercept edges (battery→track) with shaped costs.
  4. Run the selected SSSP algorithm from battery sources at t=0.
  5. Enumerate lowest-cost intercept windows near the asset line and assign under ammo/cooldown limits.

CLI Usage

# Default (Delta-Stepping)
python3 script.py

# Dijkstra
python3 script.py --algo dij

# Bellman–Ford
python3 script.py --algo bf

# Reproducible scenario
python3 script.py --seed 7

Outputs

The program prints a human-readable plan like “Track 03 → Battery 1 at t=24” for selected matches, plus a JSON summary: number of nodes/edges, solver time (ms), chosen intercepts, and total label cost.

Ethical / Scope Note: This is a toy simulator for academic exploration, based entirely on synthetic data. It intentionally avoids weapon specifics, targeting detail, or real-world tactics.
#!/usr/bin/env python3 # -*- coding: utf-8 -*- """ Counter-swarm graph pipeline (educational demo) ----------------------------------------------- Implements the abstract pipeline from the blog post: - Time-expanded directed graph over horizon [0..T] - SSSP variants: Bellman–Ford, Dijkstra, Delta-Stepping (bucketed near-linear) - Backtrack to enumerate feasible intercept windows - Min-cost assignment with ammo/thermal/comm limits Ethical/Scope note: This is a toy simulator for academic exploration only. It avoids weapon-specific or tactical guidance and uses synthetic data. Source framing: https://rkhouja.blogspot.com/2025/08/countering-drone-swarms-with-graph.html """ from __future__ import annotations import math, heapq, random, itertools, collections, time from dataclasses import dataclass, field from typing import Dict, Tuple, List, Optional, Iterable, Set try: import numpy as np except Exception: np = None # Optional; code will still run # ----------------------------- # Domain model (synthetic) # ----------------------------- @dataclass(frozen=True) class TrackID: k: int @dataclass(frozen=True) class BatteryID: b: int @dataclass class Scenario: """Synthetic scenario generator.""" n_tracks: int n_batteries: int area: Tuple[float, float] = (40.0, 40.0) # km (toy) vmax_drone: float = 0.25 # km/s (900 km/h ~ 0.25 km/s) vmax_effector: float = 0.5 # km/s (toy) kill_prob: float = 0.65 # baseline Pk T: int = 60 # seconds horizon dt: int = 3 # discretization step (s) def generate(self, seed: int = 7): rng = random.Random(seed) W, H = self.area # Random start and goal for drones; batteries fixed near bottom tracks = {} for k in range(self.n_tracks): x0, y0 = rng.uniform(0, W), rng.uniform(H*0.5, H) # spawn upper half gx, gy = rng.uniform(0, W), rng.uniform(0, H*0.2) # assets near bottom tracks[TrackID(k)] = ((x0, y0), (gx, gy)) batteries = {} for b in range(self.n_batteries): x, y = (W*(b+1)/(self.n_batteries+1), rng.uniform(0, H*0.25)) batteries[BatteryID(b)] = (x, y) return tracks, batteries # ----------------------------- # Time-expanded graph # ----------------------------- @dataclass class Node: """Node in time-expanded graph.""" t: int # integer time index 0..T/dt kind: str # 'track', 'asset', 'battery', 'intercept' ref: Tuple # (TrackID) OR (BatteryID) OR composite @dataclass class Edge: u: int v: int cost: float @dataclass class TimeExpandedGraph: nodes: List[Node] = field(default_factory=list) edges: List[Edge] = field(default_factory=list) out_adj: List[List[int]] = field(default_factory=list) # edge indices in_adj: List[List[int]] = field(default_factory=list) def add_node(self, n: Node) -> int: idx = len(self.nodes) self.nodes.append(n) self.out_adj.append([]) self.in_adj.append([]) return idx def add_edge(self, u: int, v: int, cost: float): eid = len(self.edges) self.edges.append(Edge(u, v, cost)) self.out_adj[u].append(eid) self.in_adj[v].append(eid) # ----------------------------- # Cost shaping (abstract) # ----------------------------- @dataclass class CostModel: asset_criticality: float = 10.0 time_to_impact_weight: float = 2.0 pk_weight: float = -4.0 # lowering cost if Pk is higher collateral_penalty: float = 1.0 comms_latency_penalty: float = 0.2 reload_penalty: float = 0.4 thermal_penalty: float = 0.3 jam_risk_penalty: float = 0.5 def edge_cost_track_motion(self, dtime: float, dist_to_asset: float) -> float: # Encourage shorter TTI by penalizing being far from asset as time advances return self.time_to_impact_weight * (dist_to_asset / max(dtime, 1e-3)) def edge_cost_intercept(self, pk: float, collateral: float, comms: float, reload: float, thermal: float, jam_risk: float) -> float: return (self.pk_weight * pk + self.collateral_penalty * collateral + self.comms_latency_penalty * comms + self.reload_penalty * reload + self.thermal_penalty * thermal + self.jam_risk_penalty * jam_risk) def edge_cost_asset_hit(self, criticality: float) -> float: return self.asset_criticality * criticality # ----------------------------- # Graph builder # ----------------------------- class GraphBuilder: def __init__(self, scenario: Scenario, cost_model: CostModel): self.sc = scenario self.cm = cost_model def _drone_pos(self, p0, p1, alpha): # Linear motion to goal (toy) x = p0[0] + (p1[0]-p0[0]) * alpha y = p0[1] + (p1[1]-p0[1]) * alpha return (x, y) def _dist(self, a, b): return math.hypot(a[0]-b[0], a[1]-b[1]) def build(self, seed: int = 0) -> Tuple[TimeExpandedGraph, Dict]: rng = random.Random(seed) tracks, batteries = self.sc.generate(seed=seed) T = self.sc.T dt = self.sc.dt steps = T // dt g = TimeExpandedGraph() idx = {} # Create nodes for t in range(steps+1): alpha = t / float(steps) for k, (p0, p1) in tracks.items(): pos = self._drone_pos(p0, p1, alpha) idx_key = ('track', k.k, t) idx[idx_key] = g.add_node(Node(t=t, kind='track', ref=(k, pos))) # assets (just one synthetic protected line near y=0) idx[('asset', t)] = g.add_node(Node(t=t, kind='asset', ref=('asset_line', 0.0))) for b_id, bpos in batteries.items(): idx_key = ('battery', b_id.b, t) idx[idx_key] = g.add_node(Node(t=t, kind='battery', ref=(b_id, bpos))) # Edges: track motion across time, cost increases as they approach asset for t in range(steps): t2 = t + 1 for k, (p0, p1) in tracks.items(): a1 = t / float(steps); a2 = t2 / float(steps) pos1 = self._drone_pos(p0, p1, a1) pos2 = self._drone_pos(p0, p1, a2) d_to_asset = pos2[1] # distance to y=0 boundary (toy) u = idx[('track', k.k, t)] v = idx[('track', k.k, t2)] cost = self.cm.edge_cost_track_motion(self.sc.dt, d_to_asset) g.add_edge(u, v, cost) # Edges: intercept windows (battery -> track at same time) for t in range(steps+1): for b_id, bpos in batteries.items(): bnode = idx[('battery', b_id.b, t)] for k, (p0, p1) in tracks.items(): alpha = t / float(steps) kpos = self._drone_pos(p0, p1, alpha) dist = self._dist(bpos, kpos) # Feasible if inside effector kinematics window (toy) feasible = dist <= self.sc.vmax_effector * self.sc.dt * max(1, t+1) if not feasible: continue # Abstract costs pk = self._pk_from_distance(dist) collateral = 0.1 if kpos[1] > 5 else 0.3 comms = 0.2 + 0.01 * t reload = 0.4 if (t % 5 == 0) else 0.1 thermal = 0.2 + 0.05 * (t % 4) jam_risk = 0.15 + 0.02 * (t % 3) cost = self.cm.edge_cost_intercept(pk, collateral, comms, reload, thermal, jam_risk) g.add_edge(bnode, idx[('track', k.k, t)], cost) # Edges: track -> asset hit at final layer (penalize) for k in tracks.keys(): v = idx[('track', k.k, steps)] u = idx[('asset', steps)] cost = self.cm.edge_cost_asset_hit(criticality=1.0) g.add_edge(v, u, cost) aux = dict(idx=idx, steps=steps, tracks=tracks, batteries=batteries) return g, aux def _pk_from_distance(self, d): # Toy Pk model: monotonically decays with distance return max(0.0, 1.1 * math.exp(-0.12 * d) - 0.1) # ----------------------------- # SSSP solvers # ----------------------------- INF = 1e30 class BellmanFord: @staticmethod def solve(g: TimeExpandedGraph, source_nodes: Iterable[int]) -> Tuple[List[float], List[int]]: n = len(g.nodes) dist = [INF]*n parent = [-1]*n for s in source_nodes: dist[s] = 0.0 # Relax E edges up to V-1 times for _ in range(n-1): changed = False for eid, e in enumerate(g.edges): if dist[e.u] + e.cost < dist[e.v]: dist[e.v] = dist[e.u] + e.cost parent[e.v] = e.u changed = True if not changed: break # Negative cycles not expected in this toy (we avoid them in cost shaping) return dist, parent class Dijkstra: @staticmethod def solve(g: TimeExpandedGraph, source_nodes: Iterable[int]) -> Tuple[List[float], List[int]]: n = len(g.nodes) dist = [INF]*n parent = [-1]*n pq = [] for s in source_nodes: dist[s] = 0.0 heapq.heappush(pq, (0.0, s)) while pq: d,u = heapq.heappop(pq) if d != dist[u]: continue for eid in g.out_adj[u]: e = g.edges[eid] nd = d + e.cost if nd < dist[e.v]: dist[e.v] = nd parent[e.v] = u heapq.heappush(pq, (nd, e.v)) return dist, parent class DeltaStepping: """ Bucketed near-linear SSSP for non-negative weights. Good when many edges have small bounded weights and the frontier can be relaxed in bulk (avoids global sorting bottleneck). """ @staticmethod def solve(g: TimeExpandedGraph, source_nodes: Iterable[int], delta: float = 1.0) -> Tuple[List[float], List[int]]: n = len(g.nodes) dist = [INF]*n parent = [-1]*n B: Dict[int, Set[int]] = collections.defaultdict(set) def bucket_index(x: float) -> int: return int(x // delta) for s in source_nodes: dist[s] = 0.0 B[0].add(s) i = 0 while True: # Find next non-empty bucket while i in B and not B[i]: i += 1 if i not in B: break S = set() R = set(B[i]) # requests # Light-edge relaxations while R: S |= R R2 = set() for u in list(R): for eid in g.out_adj[u]: e = g.edges[eid] w = e.cost nd = dist[u] + w if nd < dist[e.v] and w <= delta: old = dist[e.v] dist[e.v] = nd parent[e.v] = u if old < INF: B[bucket_index(old)].discard(e.v) R2.add(e.v) R = R2 # Heavy-edge relaxations for u in list(S): for eid in g.out_adj[u]: e = g.edges[eid] w = e.cost if w > delta: nd = dist[u] + w if nd < dist[e.v]: old = dist[e.v] dist[e.v] = nd parent[e.v] = u if old < INF: B[bucket_index(old)].discard(e.v) B[bucket_index(nd)].add(e.v) B[i].clear() return dist, parent # ----------------------------- # Backtracking intercept windows # ----------------------------- def backtrack_path(parent: List[int], target: int) -> List[int]: path = [] u = target while u != -1: path.append(u) u = parent[u] path.reverse() return path @dataclass class InterceptCandidate: track: TrackID battery: BatteryID time_index: int node_idx: int label_cost: float def enumerate_intercepts(g: TimeExpandedGraph, dist: List[float], aux: Dict, top_k: int = 3) -> Dict[TrackID, List[InterceptCandidate]]: """Pick top-K intercept windows per track (lowest labeled cost near asset).""" idx = aux['idx'] steps = aux['steps'] tracks: Dict[TrackID, Tuple[Tuple[float,float], Tuple[float,float]]] = aux['tracks'] batteries: Dict[BatteryID, Tuple[float,float]] = aux['batteries'] results = {} for k in tracks.keys(): cands = [] for t in range(steps+1): tr_node = idx[('track', k.k, t)] # Find any incoming edges from batteries at same t for eid in g.in_adj[tr_node]: e = g.edges[eid] u_node = g.nodes[e.u] if u_node.kind != 'battery' or u_node.t != t: continue b_id, _ = u_node.ref cands.append(InterceptCandidate(track=k, battery=b_id, time_index=t, node_idx=tr_node, label_cost=dist[tr_node])) cands.sort(key=lambda c: c.label_cost) results[k] = cands[:top_k] return results # ----------------------------- # Min-cost assignment (bipartite) # ----------------------------- @dataclass class AssignmentLimits: ammo_per_battery: int = 3 thermal_cooldown: int = 2 # minimal time distance between shots per battery comms_slots_per_t: int = 999 # unlimited in toy def min_cost_assign(intercepts: Dict[TrackID, List[InterceptCandidate]], limits: AssignmentLimits) -> Dict[TrackID, Optional[InterceptCandidate]]: """ Greedy + tie-breaker matching: - Iterate tracks by best available label - Enforce ammo and per-battery cooldown This is deliberately simple, readable, and deterministic. """ # Flatten candidates flat = [] for k, lst in intercepts.items(): for c in lst: flat.append((c.label_cost, k, c)) flat.sort(key=lambda x: x[0]) # State ammo_left = collections.Counter() last_shot_t = {} chosen: Dict[TrackID, Optional[InterceptCandidate]] = {k: None for k in intercepts.keys()} for _, k, c in flat: if chosen[k] is not None: continue b = c.battery if ammo_left[b] >= limits.ammo_per_battery: continue t_prev = last_shot_t.get(b, -10**9) if c.time_index - t_prev < limits.thermal_cooldown: continue chosen[k] = c ammo_left[b] += 1 last_shot_t[b] = c.time_index return chosen # ----------------------------- # Pipeline runner # ----------------------------- def run_pipeline(sssp: str = "delta", seed: int = 0): sc = Scenario(n_tracks=12, n_batteries=4, T=60, dt=3) cm = CostModel() gb = GraphBuilder(sc, cm) g, aux = gb.build(seed=seed) # Select source nodes (batteries at t=0) sources = [] for b_id in aux['batteries'].keys(): sources.append(aux['idx'][('battery', b_id.b, 0)]) t0 = time.time() if sssp == "bf": dist, parent = BellmanFord.solve(g, sources) elif sssp == "dij": dist, parent = Dijkstra.solve(g, sources) else: dist, parent = DeltaStepping.solve(g, sources, delta=1.0) t1 = time.time() # Enumerate intercept windows & assign intercepts = enumerate_intercepts(g, dist, aux, top_k=3) plan = min_cost_assign(intercepts, AssignmentLimits(ammo_per_battery=3, thermal_cooldown=2)) # Summarize total_cost = 0.0 taken = 0 lines = [] for k, sel in sorted(plan.items(), key=lambda kv: kv[0].k): if sel is None: lines.append(f"Track {k.k:02d}: NO INTERCEPT SELECTED") else: total_cost += sel.label_cost taken += 1 lines.append(f"Track {k.k:02d}: Battery {sel.battery.b} at t={sel.time_index} " f"(label={sel.label_cost:.2f})") summary = { "sssp": sssp, "nodes": len(g.nodes), "edges": len(g.edges), "solvetime_ms": round(1000*(t1-t0), 2), "intercepts_selected": taken, "total_label_cost": round(total_cost, 3) } return summary, lines # ----------------------------- # CLI # ----------------------------- def main(): import argparse, json ap = argparse.ArgumentParser(description="Counter-swarm graph pipeline (toy).") ap.add_argument("--algo", choices=["bf", "dij", "delta"], default="delta", help="SSSP algorithm: Bellman–Ford (bf), Dijkstra (dij), Delta-Stepping (delta).") ap.add_argument("--seed", type=int, default=0) args = ap.parse_args() summary, lines = run_pipeline(sssp=args.algo, seed=args.seed) print("# Plan (toy, abstract):") for ln in lines: print(ln) print("\n# Summary:") print(json.dumps(summary, indent=2)) if __name__ == "__main__": main()

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING AND MAINTENANCE

European Intelligence: Theoretical Foundations and Strategic Challenges

Toffana, veneno y venganza: ¿Símbolo de justicia o apología de la misandria? ¿Agravio comparativo; Igualdad o revanchismo?