The use of Graph Theory to solve a bike transportation problem. This gives very good explanations about network theory on operation research.

© All Rights Reserved

12 views

The use of Graph Theory to solve a bike transportation problem. This gives very good explanations about network theory on operation research.

© All Rights Reserved

- Paper 35
- IJBE_201006_VOL002NO001
- Hilbert
- CH01_withFigures
- 1131 and 1141 Maple Exam Sample Solutions
- Jordan Canonical Form_ Theory and Practice
- A Comprehensive Computer Program for Small Signal Stability Analysis of Power Systems
- Mathematics Gate 2018 Qu
- Inventory Classification
- Lyx Shortcuts
- FTEE_77_70
- Iast.lect24
- Math Synonyms
- Jordan
- Advanced Fragility Curves of Interdependent Lifelines Using Decision
- Final Ppt Scm
- AQA-MFP4-W-QP-JUN06
- 02 Nguyen-P
- Ascii Quick Reference
- systems_des.pdf

You are on page 1of 7

Neurocomputing

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/neucom

Analytical Hierarchy Process

Yulong Gao, Yuanqing Xia n, Suichao Wu, Jianan Qiao

School of Automation, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, PR China

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:

Received 12 June 2013

Received in revised form

20 October 2013

Accepted 16 February 2014

Communicated by Lixian Zhang

Available online 28 April 2014

This paper considers the solution to gang crime combined Analytical Hierarchy Process with Graph

Theory. The main purpose is to identify the conspirators and make a priority list based on the given

message trafc in a certain crime case. To identify one person, we rstly quantify the topics through

Analytic Hierarchy Process, then establish the network model based on Graph Theory and nally

conclude the relative relevance from this person to the known conspirators and non-conspirators. The

exibility of the model is illustrated and the results show that the method is effective.

& 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:

Gang crime

Network

Graph Theory

AHP

Semantic analysis

1. Introduction

The knowledge explosion of science encourages the invention

of new technologies and contributes to the increase of economy

and enhancement of human lives. However, along with these

improvements, the crime also presents the high-tech and gang

characteristics [12]. For example, there are always some lawless

persons capturing loopholes and thus causing some troublesome

problems like internet intrusion and internet fraud [1,22], which

are detrimental to citizen's life and possessions. Compared to the

original types of criminal, the high-tech and gang characteristics

exaggerate both the detriments of these crimes and the complicity

to solve them. Although it is easy to capture some shadow conspiracy messages, it is a complex and time-consuming job to detect

most conspirators from the large message trafc.

In recent years, many algorithms and methodologies have been

developed in allusion to this kind of crime problem. Mohammad A.

Tayebi and Uwe Glsser applied mathematical models of crime data

and criminal activity as underlying semantic foundation to identify

organized crime structures in Co-offending Networks in [18]. In the

work of [10], N. Lchevin, C.A. Rabbath and P. Maupin proposed a

stability monitoring system of an Asset-Communications Network

Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: dfgaoyulong@sina.com (Y. Gao),

xia_yuanqing@bit.edu.cn (Y. Xia), wu_suichao@126.com (S. Wu),

qjn83@163.com (J. Qiao).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2014.02.041

0925-2312/& 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

established a crawler to extract specic topics for the Weblog to

analyze and visualize terrorism and crime related Weblog Social

Network in [24]. Furthermore, Network has been studied in

different areas. Many scholars pay more attention to Networked

Control Systems (NCSs) and [30] has concluded the methodologies

for NCSs with network-induced constraints. Zhang and Shi [31]

have constructed a parameterized reduced-model for a class of

discrete-time switched linear parameter varying systems and

model predictive control of networked control systems (NCSs) with

uncertain time delay and data packets disorder has been proposed

to deal with the bounded and arbitrary delays in [27]. In addition,

among the researches related to the criminal topic, semantic analysis

is commonly applied. V. Loia and the fellow authors integrate

Computational Intelligence techniques and Semantic Web methodologies to investigate a computer crime in [14]. Semantic methodology has also been applied in extracting crime information from

text in [21] and website in [25]. Besides, Semantic analysis has also

been combined with other theories to process crime problems, see

for example [23]. Semantic analysis has been widely used in many

other elds like linguistic [5,8,15], Image Processing [11,17] and

website service [9]. Also, Semantic analysis has been combined with

other methodologies like Genetic Algorithm [16,32], Statistical Relations [13] and Graph Theory [4,20] to tackle problems in other elds

besides criminology. However, the combination of semantic analysis,

Graph Theory and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) [2,3,6,26] is

122

initially adopted in this paper for solving the gang crime problem of

2012 The Interdisciplinary Contest in Modeling (ICM).

The Analytic Hierarchy Process is a structured technique for

organizing and analyzing complex decisions. Based on mathematics and psychology, it was developed by Thomas L. Saaty in the

1970s and has been extensively studied and rened since then. It

has been widely applied to decision making in various areas such

as economics, nance, politics, games and sports [28]. For example, Robert L. Nydick and Ronald Paul Hill used the AHP method to

structure the supplier selection process in [29]. Compared with

other methods like cosine transformation and circuit equivalence,

AHP is both exible and more smart, it can decrease the subjectivity of human judgment by classifying the hierarchy structure

in detail and normalization process, and the human judgment

can also gure out some latent useful messages to increase the

accuracy of the results. Graph Theory is the study of graphs, which

are mathematical structures used to model pairwise relations

between objects. In our model, the application of Graph Theory

can help decrease the subjectivity caused by human judgment

through meticulous mathematical calculation.

In order to nd out the conspirators and make a prior list, we

rstly quantify the topics through AHP and obtain their weights to

measure their suspicious degree. Then, based on Graph Theory, we

establish the network model and calculate the relevance between

any two persons using Dijkstra Algorithm [7,19,25]. Finally, we

take the sensitivity analysis and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of our model. Furthermore, we introduce keyword index

and semantic analysis to establish an Articial Intelligence System.

It can give the priority list of conspirators automatically and

diminish the subjectivity to enhance our model.

2. Problem formulation

The crime busting problem describes a gang crime. The conspirators and the possible suspected conspirators all work for the same

company in a large ofce complex. As shown in Fig. 1, ICM offers a

small set of messages from a group of 82 workers in the company that

they believe will help them nd the most likely candidates for the

unidentied co-conspirators and unknown leaders. Since the message

trafc is for all the ofce workers in the company, it is very likely that

some (maybe many) of the identied communicators in the message

trafc are not involved in the conspiracy. In fact, they are certain that

they know some people who are not in the conspiracy. Specic

information about the problem can be found in [1]. In this paper,

we focus on two requirements.

Requirement 1: It is known that the crime busting case has 83

nodes, 400 links (some involving more than 1 topic), over 21,000

words of message trafc, 15 topics (3 have been deemed to be

suspicious), 7 known conspirators, and 8 known non-conspirators.

Build a model and algorithm to prioritize the 83 nodes by

likelihood of being part of the conspiracy and explain the model

and metrics. Jerome, Delores, and Gretchen are the senior managers of the company. It would be very helpful to know if any of

them are involved in the conspiracy.

Requirement 2: How would the priority list change if new

information comes to light that Topic 1 is also connected to the

conspiracy and that Chris is one of the conspirators?

We specically focus on the topics given in the attachment and

model the crime busting using network analysis. Our goals are to

identify people in the ofce complex who are the most likely

conspirators;

draw a discriminate line separating conspirators from nonconspirators;

Before we start, some basic assumptions are needed in order to

simplify the model.

with employers;

we discriminate the ofce personnel only by serial number

instead of their names, namely, the condition that two or more

people possess the same name exists.

3. Our approach

3.1. Variables

D is a matrix where dij is an element of D and indicates the

relevance between person i and j;

person i to all the conspirators;

person i to all the non-conspirators;

3.2. Our model

To establish our model, we rstly quantify the topics through

Analytic Hierarchy Process and obtain their weights to measure their

suspicious degree. Then, based on the weights of topics and Graph

Theory, we establish the network model and calculate the relevance

between any two persons using Dijkstra Algorithm. To identify Person

i, we conclude ri which indicates the relative relevance from this

person to the known conspirators and non-conspirators.

The Analytic Hierarchy Process is a structured technique for

organizing and analyzing complex decisions. Based on mathematics

and psychology, it was developed by Thomas L. Saaty in the 1970s and

123

has been extensively studied and rened since then [28]. The

procedure for using the AHP can be summarized as follows.

First of all, we decompose the complex problem into a hierarchy

of several more easily comprehended sub-problems, namely the

elements, each of which can be analyzed independently. Elements

of a hierarchy dominate those in the lower hierarchy and are

dominated by the upper hierarchy. The relationship of domination

from top to bottom forms the hierarchy structure.

As is shown in Fig. 2, we specically focus on the topics and establish the hierarchy structure of them. The hierarchy structure consists

of three layersTarget Layer, Criterion Layer and Program Layer.

In criterion layer, we classify the topics into 5 groups according to

their contents and context. Dene C1 : The Company Operation; C2 :

Spanish; C3 : The Lives of Employees and the Company's Environment;

C4 : Company's Safety Condition; C5 : Suspicious topics;

The program layer contains the 15 topics among which some

topics are subjected to more than 1 group. We dene Tk: Topic k

(k 1; 215).

After establishing the hierarchy structure, afliation between

the upper and the lower layer is also determined. We obtain the

judge matrices by comparing any two elements in a same level

based on 19 scale method.

For the criterion layers elements C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, which are

dominated by the target layersuspicious degree, based on pairwise comparisons of the elements, we obtain matrix U (the Judge

Matrix between the target layer and the criterion layer):

U ui;j 55

where uij represents the priority degree of criterion i to criterion j

under the target layer. We use the number 19 to represent the

priority degree, the larger the number is, the bigger the priority

degree is. Here the properties of U are (1) ui;j 4 0; (2) ui;j 1=uj;i ;

(3) ui;i 1. we obtain the judge matrices between the criterion

layer and the program layer in the similar way for obtaining the

judge matrix U. Note that the criterion layer has ve elements, we

should determine the judge matrix between each element, say C1,

and the topics it dominates in the program layer. For instance, we

dene Matrix U as the judge matrix between the criterion and

topics 1, 2, 10 and 14 in the program layer. We can also obtain U,

B2, B3, B4 and B5.

0

1

0

1

1 12 1 13 15

1 3 2 3

B

C

B2 1 2 1 1 C

B 1 1 1 1C

2

3C

B

B3

C

2

B

C

C

U B 1 12 1 13 15 CB1 B

B 1 2 1 2C

B

C

2

@

A

B3 2 3 1 1 C

1

@

2A

1 12 1

3

5 3 5 2 1

Table 1

Data of R.I.

Order

R.I.

Order

R.I.

1

0

9

1.46

2

0

10

1.49

3

0.52

11

1.52

B

B2 @ 1

1

1

B5

B

B4 B

B4

@

1

2

1

1

1

1

B

B

1

B2

1

B4

B

C

1 AB 3 B

B1

B

1

B

B1

@

1

1

5

1

4

1

2

1

6

1

1

5

4

0.89

12

1.54

1

2

5

1.12

13

1.56

1

4

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

4

1

4

1

4

0

1

6C

C

CB 5 B

1

@

5C

A

1

1

6

1.26

14

1.58

7

1.36

15

1.59

8

1.41

C

2C

C

4C

C

C

1C

C

C

1C

A

1

C

1A

we obtain the eigenvectors of the judge matrices corresponding to

maximal eigenvalues.

Uw max w

judge matrices to ensure that the weights are feasible. In order to

test the consistence, we rstly calculate the consistence index C:I:

through

C:I:

max n

n1

according to the order of the judge matrix in Table 1. Finally, we

calculate consistence ratio

C:R:

C:I:

R:I:

judge matrix is acceptable. For example, the test for U is shown in

Table 2.

Since C:R: o 0:1, the judge matrix U passes the test.

We obtain C:R: for B1 ; B2 ; B3 ; B4 ; B5 as is shown in Table 3. We

conclude that matrices B1 ; B2 ; B3 ; B4 ; B5 all pass the tests.

Overall, all of the judge matrices pass the test, and the weights

obtained by the last steps are feasible and acceptable.

124

w2 0:0814; 0:1486; 0:0814; 0:2502; 0:4384T , where w2 is the

eigenvectors of matrix U. And the elements of w2 are the relative

weights of C 1 ; C 2 ; C 3 ; C 4 ; C 5 on the target layer correspondingly.

Similarly, vector w3

is the eigenvectors of matrix Bk, and the

k

elements of w3

are

the

relative

weights of corresponding elements

k

in program layer on Ck(k 1; 2; 3; 4; 5). Hence, w3

1 0:4554;

0:1409; 0:2628; 0:1409T where the elements of w3

are

the weights

1

of T1, T2, T10, T14 on C1. Similarly, we can also obtain w23 ; w3

3 ;

3

w3

4 ; w5 .

In order to evaluate the suspicious degree of the topics, we

need to calculate the combining weight of the topics in the

program layer relative to the target layer via

W 3 t 3 W 2

where W

is the weight of the corresponding element on level 2

relative to the target layer and t 3 is the weight of the element on

level 3 relative to that on level 2.

As is shown in Table 4, we obtain the weights of the 15 topics in

the program layer relative to the target layer through calculation.

3.2.2. Establish the network model

With the weights of the topics known, we establish the singledirected weighted network model in order to determine the

relevance between any two persons.

As is shown in Fig. 1, the network graph contains 83 nodes and

400 links. The graph is represented by GV; E, where V is the set of

ofce personnel, E is the set of edges. From the basic denition of

adjacency matrix introduced in the general model, we obtain this

models adjacency matrix A8383 . And aij is an element of matrix A,

and indicates the adjacent relationship between node i and j.

If there is an edge from node i to node j, aij 1; on the contrary,

aij 0.

In the crime busting problem, we conclude a persons relevance

with the conspiracy by using the similar algorithm for calculating

the shortest path. And the larger the relevance is, the more

suspicious the person is.

We rstly determine the Input Matrix M 8383 . mij is one element

of M, and indicates the relationship between node i and j. If they are

adjacent, mij is the sum of the weights of all the topics between

We dene

8

1 if pi;j 0

>

<

if pi;j 1

di;j 0

>

:p

if pi;j a 1πj a 0

i;j

max

5.0153

Normalized eigenvector

5

0:003415 o 0:1

node i to j.

3.2.3. Solution

Based on the foregoing calculations, we can conclude the

relevance between any two nodes. From Matrix D8383 , we dene

ci as the average of the sum of the relevance between and every

known conspirator. Thus, we have the column vector C c0 ;

c1 ; ; c82 T .

Similarly, we dene gi as the average of the sum of the

relevance from i to all of the known non-conspirators. Thus, we

have the column vector G g 0 ; g 1 ; ; g 82 T . Then, taking the ratio

of C to G, we can determine the suspicious degree for any one

person i.

We dene

ri

ci

gi

difference that the manager might communicate with more

people about various kinds of topics, we expand the upper limit

of the relevance for non-conspirator. The specic classication is

shown below in Table 5.

3.3. The main results

Table 5

The specic classication.

Classication

Relevance

Character

Manager

0 o r i o 1:05

1:05 o r i o 1:15

1:15 o r i

Non-conspirator

Uncertain

Conspirator

Employer

0 o r i o 1:00

1:00 o r i o 1:15

1:15 o r i

Non-conspirator

Uncertain

Conspirator

Table 3

Test result for B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 .

C:R:

We obtain the results based on the foregoing Solution. And the

results are shown in Table 6.

Table 2

Test result for U.

n

C.R.

these two adjacent nodes. If they are not adjacent, mij is innite.

Otherwise, the diagonal elements of M are 0. Dene a matrix D8383

whose elements indicate the relevance between nodes. In order to

obtain D8383 , we rstly determine the transition matrix P. pij is an

element of matrix.

(

mi;k mk;j if mi;k mk;j o mi;j

pi;j

5

mi;j

if mi;k mk;j Z mi;j

B1

B2

B3

B4

B5

0.0039

0.0173

0.0227

Table 4

The Topics' weight for Requirement 1.

Topic

Weight

1

0.0371

2

0.0610

3

0.0073

4

0.0154

5

0.0256

6

0.0357

7

0.1956

Topic

Weight

9

0.0077

10

0.0214

11

0.2732

12

0.0572

13

0.2272

14

0.0115

15

0.0164

8

0.0077

125

Table 6

The specic results with priority rank for Requirement 1.

Classication

Name(Number)

Conspirators

Elsie(7), Jean(18), Alex(21), Paul(43), Harvey(49), Ulf(54), Yao(67), Le(61), Lao(58), Hark(70), Cory(71), Bariol(75), Mai(62), Gerry(77), Cole(76),

Quan(63), Andra(72), Vind(52), Gretchen(4), Gretchen(32), Dayi(51), Phille(79), Beth(38), Olina(55), Hazel(8), Carina(73), Franklin(24), Douglas(40),

Elsie(37), Sandy(12), Marion(13), Karen(5)

Non-conspirators Chris(0), Paige(2), Darlene(48), Gard(74), Tran(64), Jia(65), Ellin(68), Este(78), Darol(59), Cha(56), Sheng(57), Seeni(81), Beth(14), Crystal(20),

Kristina(1), Stephanie(30), Dwight(28), Marcia(27), Chara(53), Han(69), Lois(45), Shelley(35), Delores(10), Erica(39), Kim(33), Julia(15), Claire(25),

Louis(46), Patricia(44), Jerome(34), Priscilla(36), Jerome(16)

Uncertain

Wesley(23), Sherri(3), Kristine(19), Marian(26), William(50), Patrick(6), Katherine(42), Eric(22), Wayne(29), Malcolm(9), Reni(82), Melia(66),

Neal(31), Fanti(80), Francis(11), Lars(60), Christina(47), Donald(41), Neal(17)

Note: The bold ones are known conspirators and non-conspirators. Grethen(4), Delores(10) and Jerome(16) are considered to be managers. The order of names of

conspirators is determined by the relevance ri from the largest to the smallest.

Table 7

The topics' weight for Requirement 1.

Topic

Weight

1

0.1467

2

0.0610

3

0.0073

4

0.0154

5

0.0256

6

0.0357

7

0.1591

Topic

Weight

9

0.0077

10

0.0214

11

0.2367

12

0.0572

13

0.1907

14

0.0115

15

0.0164

8

0.0077

Table 8

The specic results with priority rank for Requirement 1.

Classication

Name(Number)

Conspirators

Chris(0), Elsie(7), Jean(18), Alex(21), Paul(43),Harvey(49), Ulf(54), Yao(67), Le(61), Lao(58), Hark(70), Cory(71), Bariol(75), Gerry(77), Mai(62),

Andra(72), Cole(76), Vind(52), Quan(63), Dayi(51), Phille(79), Gretchen(4), Olina(55), Carina(73), Gretchen(32), Marion(13), Karen(5), Franklin(24),

Elsie(37), Hazel(8), William(50), Wesley(23), Sherri(3), Beth(38), Sandy(12), Kristine(19), Melia(66)

Non-conspirators Paige(2), Darlene(48), Tran(64), Jia(65), Ellin(68), Este(78), Gard(74), Darol(59), Cha(56), Sheng(57), Seeni(81), Crystal(20), Kristina(1), Dwight(28),

Chara(53), Beth(14), Stephanie(30), Han(69), Lois(45), Shelley(35), Marcia(27), Erica(39), Kim(33), Julia(15), Claire(25), Delores(10), Jerome(16)

Uncertain

Eric(22), Katherine(42), Lars(60), Patrick(6), Douglas(40), Malcolm(9), Marian(26), Wayne(29), Donald(41), Reni(82), Patricia(44), Jerome(34),

Christina(47), Fanti(80), Neal(31), Priscilla(36), Francis(11), Neal(17), Louis(46)

Note: The bold ones are known conspirators and non-conspirators. Grethen(4), Delores(10) and Jerome(16) are considered to be managers. The order of names of

conspirators is determined by the relevance ri from the largest to the smallest.

Parallel to Results for requirement1, this part contains similar

quantication, model and solution with the added information

that Topic 1 is also connected to the conspiracy and that Chris is

one of the conspirators.

We rstly take Analytic Hierarchy Process, which is similar to

that of Results for requirement1, to quantify the topics with the

added information.

Compared with Results for requirement1, the differences are the

judge matrix and corresponding relative weight vector, which are

shown below:

0

1

B1

B

B5 B

@1

1C

C

C

1A

and

T

w3

5 0:25; 0:25; 0:25; 0:25

remains. Overall, all of the judge matrices pass the test, and the

weights obtained are feasible and acceptable.

The specic results for weights of the topics are shown in

Table 7.

the same with that for Requirement 1 except some changes

on data processing. Based on the foregoing results of weights for

topics in requirement 2, we conclude the nal results which are

shown in Table 8.

As is shown in Fig. 3, for Requirement 1, there are 32

conspirators, 32 non-conspirators and 19 for uncertain. While for

Requirement 2, there are 37 conspirators, 27 non-conspirators

and 19 for uncertain. Because of the added suspicious topic and

conspirator, more people are considered to be involved in the

conspiracy.

In this section, we take sensitivity analysis for the uncertain

groups in Requirements 1 and 2.

We rstly diminish the ducial interval for the uncertain group

by decreasing the upper limit from 1.15 to 1.10, that is to say

we can adjust the investigation range by changing the ducial

interval.

The results and comparisons are shown in Figs. 4 and 5, from

which we conclude that about 40% of the uncertain people are

located in the interval from 1.10 to 1.15.

126

for Requirements 1 and 2. We classify the ofce personnel into

three groupsconspirators, non-conspirators and uncertain ones

according to the ducial interval. Next, we introduce semantic

analysis to enhance our model for Requirement 3. Finally, we take

sensitivity analysis to prove the exibility of our model and

conclude that about 40% of the uncertain people are located in

the interval from 1.10 to 1.15.

Acknowledgments

Program of China (973 Program) (2012CB720000), the National

Natural Science Foundation of China (61225015, 60974011), the

Ph. D. Programs Foundation of Ministry of Education of China

(20091101110023, 20111101110012), and Beijing Municipal Natural

Science Foundation (4102053, 4101001, 4132042), Beijing higher

education young elite teacher project under Grant YETP1212.

References

4. Conclusions

We develop a network model to solve the crime busting

problem through several steps. We rstly apply AHP (Analytic

Hierarchy Process) to quantify the topics and obtain their weights.

[1] /http://www.comap.com/undergraduate/contests/mcm/contests/2012/pro

blems/S.

[2] W.J. Bao, Z.Y. Wu, The analytic hierarchy process method for integrate

distribution issue of agricultural products logistics, in: 2011 International

Conference of Information Technology, Computer Engineering and Management Sciences, 2011, pp. 342344.

[3] G. Cheng, Y. Li, J.Q. Chang, X.F. Sun, The research and application of vehicle

comfortableness based on analytic hierarchy process method, in: 2010 IEEE

17Th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering

Management, 2010, pp. 11241128.

[4] J.A. Danowski, Semantic network analysis of Islamist sources using time slices

as Nodes and semantic similarity as link strengths: some Implications for

propaganda analysis about Jihad, in: 2012 European Intelligence and Security

Informatics Conference, 2012, pp. 164171.

[5] M. Dasclu, C. Dobre, . Truan-Matu, V. CristeaBeyond, Traditional NLP: a

distributed solution for optimizing chat processing automatic chat assessment

using tagged latent semantic analysis. in: 2011 10th International Symposium

on Parallel and Distributed Computing, 2011, pp. 133138.

[6] J. Fei, H. Xu, Assessing computer network security with fuzzy analytic

hierarchy process, in: 2010 2nd International Conference on Advanced

Computer Control, vol. 5, 2010, pp. 204208.

[7] N. Jasika, N. Alispahic, A. Elma, K. Ilvana, L. Elma, N. Nosovic, Dijkstra's shortest

path algorithm serial and parallel execution performance analysis, in: 2012

Proceedings of the 35th International Convention, 2012, pp. 18111815.

[8] Y.J. Jin, A hybrid-strategy method combining semantic analysis with rulebased MT for patent machine translation, in: 2010 International Conference on

Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Engineering, 2010, pp. 14.

[9] M. Kudelka, V. Snasel, O. Lehecka, E. El-Qawasmeh, Semantic analysis of web

pages using web patterns, in: IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web

Intelligence, 2006, pp. 329333.

[10] N. Lchevin, C.A. Rabbath, P. Maupin, Toward a stability monitoring system of

an asset-communications network exposed to malicious attacks, in: 2011

American Control Conference, 2011, pp. 22102215.

[11] X.K. Li, Z.G. Zhu, Automatic object classication through semantic analysis, in:

2008 20th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Articial Intelligence,

2008, pp. 497504.

[12] J.Q. Liang, K. Zhang, F. Gao, Finding conspirators in criminal network, 2012

International Conference on Systems and Informatics, 2012, pp. 161166.

[13] Y.L. Liu, Y.X. Ouyang, Z. Xiong, IDR-SQE: combining semantic and statistical

relations to rene documents, in: 2009 International Conference on Information and Multimedia Technology, 2009, pp. 139143.

[14] V. Loia, M. Mattiucci, S. Senatore, M. Veniero, Computer crime investigation by

means of fuzzy semantic maps, in: 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint

Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technologies, vol. 3,

2009, pp. 183186.

[15] V. Pinheiro, T. Pequeno, V. Furtado, D. Nogueira, Semantic inferentialist

analyser: a semantic analyser for natural language sentences, in: 2009 Seventh

Brazilian Symposium in Information and Human Language Technology, 2009,

pp. 8997.

[16] W. Song, S.C. Park, Analysis of web clustering based on genetic algorithm with

latent semantic indexing technology, in: 2007 Sixth International Conference

on Advanced Language Processing and Web Information Technology, 2007,

pp. 2126.

[17] E. Spyrou, G. Tolias, P. Mylonas, Y. Avrithis, A semantic multimedia analysis

approach utilizing a region thesaurus and LSA, in: 2008 Ninth International

Workshop on Image Analysis for Multimedia Interactive Services, 2008, pp. 811.

in: 2011 IEEE Ninth International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and

Secure Computing, 2011, pp. 846858.

[19] A. Ullrich, C.V. Forst, k-PathA: k-shortest path algorithm, in: 2009 International Workshop on High Performance Computational Systems Biology, 2009,

pp. 2330.

[20] R. Vandenberghe, Y. Wang, N. Nelissen, M. Vandenbulcke, T. Dhollander, S.

Sunaert, P. Dupont, The associative-semantic network for words and pictures:

effective connectivity and graph analysis, in: Brain and Language. Available

online 18th October 2012.

[21] P. Vladia, F. Vasco, P. Tarcisio, N. Douglas, Natural language processing based

on semantic inferentialism for extracting crime information from text, in:

2010 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics,

2010, pp. 1924.

[22] W. Yan, F. Liu, Semantic scheme to extract attack strategies for web service

network security, in: 2004 Proceedings IEEE Workshop on IP Operations and

Management, 2004, pp. 104111.

[23] C.C. Yang, C.P. Wei, K.W. Li, Using associate constraint network with forward

evaluation to overcome cross-lingual semantic interoperability challenge for

crime information extraction, in: 2006 IEEE International Conference on

Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2006, pp. 11251130.

[24] C.C. Yang, T.D. Ng, Terrorism and crime related weblog social network: link,

content analysis and information visualization, in: 2007 IEEE Intelligence and

Security Informatics, 2007, pp. 5558.

[25] F.H. Zhang, J.P. Liu, An algorithm of shortest path based on Dijkstra for huge

data, in: 2009 Sixth International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, vol. 4, 2009, pp. 244247.

[26] K. Zhang, Application of analytic hierarchy process for intellectual property

rights in high-tech public corporation, in: 2011 Seventh International Conference on Natural Computation, 2011, pp. 19851988.

[27] X.M. Tang, B.C. Ding, Design of networked control systems with bounded

arbitrary time delays, Int. J. Autom. Comput. 9 (2012) 182190.

[28] T.L. Satty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource

Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.

[29] R.L. Nydick, R.P. Hill, Using the analytic hierarchy process to structure the

supplier selection procedure, Int. J. Purch. Mater. Manag. (1992) 3338.

[30] L.X. Zhang, H.j. Gao, O. Kaynak, Network-induced constraints in networked

control systems survey, IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat. 9 (2013) 403416.

[31] L.X. Zhang, P. Shi, l2 l1 Model reduction for switched LPV systems with

average dwell time, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 53 (2008) 24432448.

[32] K. Jebari, A. Bouroumi, A. Ettouhami, Fuzzy genetic sharing for dynamic

optimization, Int. J. Autom. Comput. 9 (2012) 616626.

1990. He received the B.S. degree in Automation in

2013 from Beijing Institute of Technology. He is now

pursuing the M.S. degree in Control Science and Engineer in Beijing Institute of Technology. His research

interests include mathematical modeling, multi-agent

control and nonlinear system.

1971 and graduated from the Department of Mathematics, Chuzhou University, Chuzhou, China, in 1991.

He received his M.S. degree in Fundamental Mathematics from Anhui University, China, in 1998 and his

Ph.D. degree in Control Theory and Control Engineering

from Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing, China, in 2001. From 1991 to 1995, he was

with Tongcheng Middle-School, Anhui, China, where he

worked as a teacher. During January 2002November

2003, he was a Postdoctoral Research Associate in the

Institute of Systems Science, Academy of Mathematics

and System Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences,

127

November 2003 to February 2004, he was with the National University of

Singapore as a Research Fellow, where he worked on variable structure control.

From February 2004 to February 2006, he was with the University of Glamorgan,

Pontypridd, U.K., as a Research Fellow, where he worked on networked control

systems. From February 2007 to June 2008, he was a Guest Professor with

Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria, where he worked on biomedical

signal processing. Since July 2004, he has been with the Department of Automatic

Control, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, rst as an Associate Professor, then,

since 2008, as a Professor and in 2012, he was appointed as Xu Teli Distinguished

Professor at the Beijing Institute of Technology and obtained the National Science

Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholars of China.

His current research interests are in the elds of networked control systems,

robust control and signal processing, active disturbance rejection control and ight

control. He has published six monographs in Springer and John Wiley, and more

than 100 papers in journals. He is an Editor in deputy of the Journal of the Beijing

Institute of Technology, Associate Editor of Acta Automatica Sinica, Control Theory

and Applications, International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and

Control, International Journal of Automation and Computing. He obtained the

Second Award of the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology (No. 1) in 2010, the

Second National Award for Science and Technology (No. 2) in 2011, and the Second

Natural Science Award of The Ministry of Education (No. 1) in 2012.

1989. He received the B.S. degree in Automation in

2013 from Beijing Institute of Technology. He is now

pursuing the M.S. degree in Electrical Engineering in

Washington University in St. Louis. His research interests include system control and real time systems.

1990. He received the B.S. degree in Automation in

2013 from Beijing Institute of Technology. He is now

pursuing the M.S. degree in Control Science and Engineer in Beijing Institute of Technology. His research

interests include mathematical modeling, image analysis and processing.

- Paper 35Uploaded byho-fa
- IJBE_201006_VOL002NO001Uploaded byAriel Ogrocki
- HilbertUploaded byCepa Ugol
- CH01_withFiguresUploaded bymrvaskez
- 1131 and 1141 Maple Exam Sample SolutionsUploaded byheyyheyyheyy
- Jordan Canonical Form_ Theory and PracticeUploaded byhungkg
- A Comprehensive Computer Program for Small Signal Stability Analysis of Power SystemsUploaded byphieuxuatkho
- Mathematics Gate 2018 QuUploaded byalvipin001
- Inventory ClassificationUploaded byHaneesha Muddasani
- Lyx ShortcutsUploaded bybar
- FTEE_77_70Uploaded byMariya Pavlova
- Iast.lect24Uploaded byIgor
- Math SynonymsUploaded byGean Kleber
- JordanUploaded byelectroteknica
- Advanced Fragility Curves of Interdependent Lifelines Using DecisionUploaded byMichael Bautista Baylon
- Final Ppt ScmUploaded bySiddhartha Goel
- AQA-MFP4-W-QP-JUN06Uploaded byVũ Lê
- 02 Nguyen-PUploaded byAsep Deden Rahmat S
- Ascii Quick ReferenceUploaded byneotn_neo
- systems_des.pdfUploaded bydyaataha7902
- prog3Uploaded bydennissimo
- am35Uploaded byBruno Vernochi
- Cosaliency Toshev Shi Daniilidis 2007Uploaded byemmanuel
- 318Uploaded byFahad Ahmad Khan
- The Monad.Reader Issue 21Uploaded bygliptak
- Java matrixUploaded byRodrigo Daza
- Home12Uploaded byJacob Higer
- Jens Zemke - Abstract Perturbed Krylov MethodsUploaded byJulio Cesar Barraza Bernaola
- Linear Systems Ch4 [Compatibility Mode]Uploaded byUmair Zulfiqar
- karpfinger2010.pdfUploaded byMarco Antonio

- 1.-Ekiert-2003Uploaded byRusu Sadovei Adriana
- ModelingInflowPerformanceRelationshipsIPR-Uploaded byhasan
- D01-T1L3-GT053-1-RG-001-0AUploaded byAlket Dhami
- ApplicationsDigitalSignalProcessingPracticalApproach15ITAeUploaded byChetan Kotwal
- The “Fragment on Machines” and the Grundrisse. The Workerist Reading in Question -Riccardo Bellofiore and Massimiliano TombaUploaded byAlessandro Zanasi
- Cables - Cable Fault Locating and Test Van and TrailerUploaded bycadtil
- Wire Rope User's Manual (AISI)Uploaded byGary J. Davis, P. E.
- Paint Cycle Electric Motors Types 1MB10 - 1MB15Uploaded byjjerman
- NLSC Lecture Notes 2017Uploaded bykkkprot
- Filmaking Techniques Video WorksheetUploaded bymrsglasius
- DSAgilev7.0-Brochure-EN-2018-04-Grid-GA-1645.pdfUploaded bythank
- Delta Versus Wye Connected Capacitor Banks.pdfUploaded byanoop116
- Straight Bending BeamUploaded byAzfar Fauzi Akbar
- Sylvania Understanding Lighting Brochure 1988Uploaded byAlan Masters
- USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD Study and Evaluate the Sales Strategies Adopted by Sales Management Thesis 117pUploaded byajitinghajimal
- Ansys Meshing TutorialUploaded byUppala Krishna Chaitanya
- How to Change Your Electric Guitar StringsUploaded byBrendan Cassidy
- Continental Drift LabUploaded byIliana Angela Asensio Llosa
- Lab 1-LinuxUploaded byanubhav
- INDUCTIONUploaded byMaruthi Jacs
- Effective Leadership Lec 3 - FollowershipUploaded byMat Harzick
- How To Become A Master In Your Field – Mastery By Robert Greene _ Pinnacle Of Man™Uploaded byinag2012
- Schema presentation.pptUploaded byjimlougabs
- Classifier and Construction_ the Interaction of Grammatical123Uploaded bythangdaotao
- content-1Uploaded byRinkesh Prajapati
- 12 Ip Java Notes 1Uploaded bysubhash varghese
- Self Assembled Monolayers -A ReviewUploaded byMeghna Sheoran
- Werewolf Card SetUploaded byKharisma Dwi Veteriananta
- Advantages of Prestressed ConcreteUploaded byEdilberto Tibacan Villamil
- basic KundaliUploaded byDevendra Godambe