Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-ggg9q Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-31T08:27:23.145Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A two-stage multi-population wolf pack algorithm for task allocation in multi-UAV cooperative reconnaissance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2025

X. Lv Open the ORCID record for X. Lv [Opens in a new window] ,
H. Zhang Open the ORCID record for H. Zhang [Opens in a new window] ,
L. Zuo ,
Y. Zhang Open the ORCID record for Y. Zhang [Opens in a new window]  and
B. Shi Open the ORCID record for B. Shi [Opens in a new window]
X. Lv
Affiliation:
College of Computer Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan, China
H. Zhang
Affiliation:
College of Computer Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan, China
L. Zuo
Affiliation:
College of Computer Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan, China
Y. Zhang
Affiliation:
College of Computer Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan, China
B. Shi*
Affiliation:
College of Computer Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan, China
*
Corresponding author: B. Shi; Email: beileishi1981@163.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The multi-UAV task allocation problem can be divided into two components: optimising UAV resource allocation and developing an optimal execution plan. Existing single-population algorithms often get trapped in local optima and require improved accuracy. Although multi-population algorithms perform better, they introduce higher complexity, significantly increasing running time. This paper proposes a Two-Stage Multi-Population Wolf Pack Algorithm (2SMPWPA) to address these issues. This algorithm innovatively splits the task allocation problem into two stages: the initial stage focuses on optimising UAV resource utilisation. In contrast, the subsequent stage focuses on optimising the execution plans for the existing UAV resources. Furthermore, the algorithm categorises the population into a leader group and two normal groups, where the leader group consists of elite individuals from the ordinary groups. To ensure the outstanding individuals in the normal groups have adequate computational resources, a population competition mechanism is introduced to dynamically adjust the size of each sub-population based on their average contribution to the optimal solution. To prevent the ‘big eats small’ scenario, the algorithm incorporates population protection and migration mechanisms to maintain diversity. Additionally, a population communication mechanism is implemented to preserve ‘vitality’ during the later iterations, preventing the algorithm from converging to local optima. Comparative experiments demonstrate that the 2SMPWPA significantly outperforms recent algorithms regarding solution accuracy, effectively addressing the trade-off between solution precision and running time.

Keywords

UAV swarmtask allocationtwo-stagemulti-populationpopulation competitionpopulation migrationpopulation communication

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 129 , Issue 1341 , November 2025 , pp. 3109 - 3141
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Liu, S., et al. Technical development and future prospects of cooperative terminal guidance based on knowledge graph analysis: a review. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A, 2025, 26, (7), pp 605–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poudel, S. and Moh, S. Task assignment algorithms for unmanned aerial vehicle networks: A comprehensive survey, Veh. Commun., 2022, 35, p 100469.Google Scholar
Derrouaoui, S.H., Bouzid, Y., Belmouhoub, A., Guiatni, M. and Siguerdidjane, H. Recent developments and trends in unconventional UAVs control: a review, J. Intell. Robot. Syst., 2023, 109, (3), p 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, J., Duan, H. and Lao, S. Swarm intelligence algorithms for multiple unmanned aerial vehicles collaboration: a comprehensive review, Artif. Intell. Rev., 2023, 56, (5), pp 4295–4327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J., Wen, P. and Xiong, A. Application of improved quantum particle swarm optimization algorithm to multi-task assignment for heterogeneous UAVs, in 2022 6th Asian Conference on Artificial Intelligence Technology (ACAIT), IEEE, 2022, pp 1–5.Google Scholar
Peng, Q., Wu, H. and Xue, R. Review of dynamic task allocation methods for UAV swarms oriented to ground targets, Complex Syst. Model. Simul., 2021, 1, (3), pp 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S., Lin, Z., Huang, W., and Yan, B. Current development and future prospects of multi-target assignment problem: A bibliometric analysis review. Def. Technol., 2025, 43, pp 44–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jia, G. and Wang, J. A review on mission planning methods of UAV cluster, Syst. Eng. Electron, 2021, 43, (1), pp 99–111.Google Scholar
Yu, X., Gao, X., Wang, L., Wang, X., Ding, Y., Lu, C. and Zhang, S. Cooperative multi-UAV task assignment in cross-regional joint operations considering ammunition inventory. Drones, 2022, 6, (3), p 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yahia, H.S. and Mohammed, A.S. Path planning optimization in unmanned aerial vehicles using meta-heuristic algorithms: a systematic review, Environ. Monit. Assess., 2023, 195, (1), p 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khochare, A., Sorbelli, F.B., Simmhan, Y. and Das, S.K. Improved algorithms for co-scheduling of edge analytics and routes for UAV fleet missions, IEEE/ACM Trans. Ntwrk., 2023, 32, (1), pp 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basil, N., Sabbar, B.M., Marhoon, H.M., Mohammed, A.F. and Ma’arif, A. Systematic review of unmanned aerial vehicles control: challenges, solutions, and meta-heuristic optimization, Int. J. Robot. Control Syst., 2024, 4, (4), p 1794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derrouaoui, S.H., Bouzid, Y., Doula, A., Boufroua, M.A., Belmouhoub, A., Guiatni, M. and Hamissi, A. Trajectory tracking control of a morphing UAV using radial basis function artificial neural network based fast terminal sliding mode: theory and experimental, Aerosp. Sci. Technol., 2024, 155, p 109719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z., Wang, B., Wei, Y., Liu, P. and Zhang, L. Cooperative multi-task assignment of multiple UAVs with improved genetic algorithm based on beetle antennae search, in 39th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), IEEE, 2020, pp 1605–1610.Google Scholar
Yan, F., Chu, J., Hu, J. and Zhu, X. Cooperative task allocation with simultaneous arrival and resource constraint for multi-UAV using a genetic algorithm, Exp. Syst. Appl., 245, p 123023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, S., Wu, J. and Ai, J. Multi-UAV reconnaissance task allocation for heterogeneous targets using ground ant colony optimization algorithm, Soft Comput., 25, (10), pp 7155–7167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, S., Li, L., Zhou, Z., Mao, Y. and Huang, J. A task allocation strategy of the UAV swarm based on multi-discrete wolf pack algorithm, Appl. Sci., 2022, 12, (3), p 1331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, D., Ban, X., Ji, L., Guan, X., Liu, K. and Qian, X. An adaptive shrinking grid search chaotic wolf optimization algorithm using standard deviation updating amount, Comput. Intell. Neurosci., 2020, 2020, (1), p 7986982.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, X., Cheng, F., Liu, C., Cheng, L. and Mao, Y. An improved Wolf pack algorithm for optimization problems: design and evaluation, Plos One, 2021, 16, (8), p e0254239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhu, Q., Wu, H., Li, N. and Hu, J. A Chaotic disturbance Wolf pack algorithm for solving ultrahigh-dimensional complex functions, Complexity, 2021, 2021, (1), p 6676934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S., Zhu, D., Zhou, C. and Sun, G. Improved grey wolf algorithm based on dynamic weight and logistic mapping for safe path planning of UAV low-altitude penetration. J. Supercomput., 2024, 80, (18), pp 25818–25852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, H., Shen, S., Yu, M., Yang, Z., Fei, M. and Zhou, H. Multi-population techniques in nature inspired optimization algorithms: a comprehensive survey, Swarm Evol. Comput., 2021, 44, pp 365–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vafashoar, R. and Meybodi, M.R. A multi-population differential evolution algorithm based on cellular learning automata and evolutionary context information for optimization in dynamic environments, Appl. Soft Comput., 2020, 88, p 106009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raghul, S. and Jeyakumar, G. A hybrid multi-population reinitialization strategy to tackle dynamic optimization problems. IEEE Access., 2023, 11, pp 114270–114282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qin, J., Huang, C. and Luo, Y. Adaptive multi-swarm in dynamic environments, Swarm Evol. Comput., 2021, 63, p 100870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H., Lv, X., Ma, C. and Cui, L. An elite Wolf pack algorithm based on the probability threshold for a multi-UAV cooperative reconnaissance mission, Drone, 2024, 8, (9), p 513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qin, P., Li, J., Zhang, J. and Fu, Y. Joint task allocation and trajectory optimization for multi-UAV collaborative air-ground edge computing. IEEE Trans. Ntwrk. Sci. Eng., 2024, 11, (6), pp 6231–6243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, M., Zhou, A., Li, C., Guan, J. and Yan, X. CCFR2: A more efficient cooperative co-evolutionary framework for large-scale global optimization, Inf. Sci., 2020, 512, pp 64–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, W., Li, L., Teng, L. and Yonglu, W. Multi-UAV reconnaissance task allocation for heterogeneous targets using an opposition-based genetic algorithm with double-chromosome encoding, Chin. J. Aeronaut., 2018, 31, (2), pp 339–350.Google Scholar
Wang, G., Lv, X., Ben, K. and Cui, L. A particle swarm optimization algorithm based on experience pool for multi-UAV cooperative reconnaissance task allocation, in 26th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, IEEE, 2023, pp 861–866.Google Scholar