pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00823 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.NA

Reliability, Robustness, and Resilience Modeling for Surveillance System in Advanced Air Mobility Operations

Esrat Farhana Dulia , Caleb Adams , Syed Arbab Mohd Shihab , Ruben Del Rosario This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 18:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.NA
keywords reliability modelingrobustnessresiliencesurveillance systemsadvanced air mobilitysensor networksairspace operations
0
0 comments X

The pith

A 3R modeling framework sets sensor requirements for reliable surveillance in Advanced Air Mobility operations.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes models for reliability under normal conditions, robustness during perturbations such as weather or traffic surges, and resilience after sensor failures, all applied to a multi-type sensor network for Advanced Air Mobility surveillance. This separation allows planners to calculate baseline coverage needs, extra capacity for disruptions, and backup strategies for outages. A reader would care because continuous detection and tracking of aircraft in low-altitude airspace is required to prevent collisions and enable safe operations with new vehicle types. The approach focuses on optimal design and dispatch of sensors to maintain performance across these scenarios.

Core claim

The central claim is that a comprehensive 3R modeling framework for the Surveillance for Advanced Air Mobility system can determine optimal multi-type sensor networks by using reliability modeling for baseline coverage and detection under normal operations, robustness modeling to identify additional sensors needed for external perturbations such as adverse weather or increased traffic demand, and resilience modeling to develop backup sensor deployment and dispatch strategies that minimize disruptions from primary sensor failures.

What carries the argument

The 3R modeling framework, which separately formulates reliability for coverage requirements, robustness for handling perturbations, and resilience through backup strategies.

If this is right

  • Reliability modeling specifies the sensor types, quantities, and locations needed for surveillance coverage and detection in normal conditions.
  • Robustness modeling identifies extra sensors required to maintain performance during adverse weather or sudden traffic increases.
  • Resilience modeling produces backup sensor deployment and dispatch plans to provide temporary coverage after primary failures.
  • The combined framework supports safe continuation of Advanced Air Mobility operations by addressing all three performance aspects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The separate 3R models could be extended to include cost or energy constraints when selecting sensor types and locations.
  • Real-time updates to the robustness and resilience components might allow dynamic sensor reallocation during live operations.
  • Similar modeling could apply to surveillance needs in other low-altitude systems such as drone delivery networks.

Load-bearing premise

The reliability, robustness, and resilience models can be separately formulated and applied to set sensor requirements and strategies without integration issues or real-world performance data for sensors under varying conditions.

What would settle it

Field tests or simulations demonstrating that sensor placements from the separate 3R models fail to sustain required coverage during simultaneous adverse weather and primary sensor outages would falsify the framework.

read the original abstract

Ensuring the safe and efficient operation of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) in low-altitude airspace requires a reliable, robust, and resilient surveillance system capable of continuously detecting, identifying, and tracking aircraft under both normal and off-nominal conditions. To address this need, this study develops a comprehensive 3R modeling framework, reliability, robustness, and resilience, for the Surveillance for Advanced Air Mobility (SAM) system, with a focus on the optimal design and operation of a multi-type sensor network. Under normal operating conditions, the reliability model determines the baseline sensor types, quantities, and locations required to satisfy surveillance coverage and detection requirements. To address external perturbations, such as adverse weather conditions or sudden increases in AAM traffic demand, the robustness model identifies additional sensor requirements needed to maintain system performance. Furthermore, for surveillance outages caused by primary sensor failures, the resiliency model develops backup sensor deployment and dispatch strategies to provide temporary surveillance coverage, minimize operational disruptions, and support the safe continuation of AAM operations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a 3R modeling framework (reliability, robustness, and resilience) for the Surveillance for Advanced Air Mobility (SAM) system, focused on optimal design and operation of a multi-type sensor network. Under normal conditions the reliability model sets baseline sensor types, quantities, and locations to meet coverage and detection requirements; the robustness model identifies extra sensors needed under perturbations such as weather or traffic surges; and the resilience model supplies backup deployment and dispatch strategies for primary-sensor outages.

Significance. A well-formulated and integrated 3R framework could supply a structured, prescriptive approach to sensor-network design that simultaneously handles nominal performance, external disturbances, and failure recovery, thereby supporting safer low-altitude AAM operations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the three models together 'enable optimal design and operation' is unsupported because no objective functions, coverage or detection-probability equations, sensor-performance parameters, or coupling constraints are supplied; each model is stated only to 'determine' or 'identify' requirements without showing how those outputs become inputs to a joint optimization procedure.
  2. [Framework description] Framework description: the reliability, robustness, and resilience models are presented as separate constructs with no explicit integration mechanism (e.g., sequential constraints, shared decision variables, or a combined objective) that would turn the three into a single prescriptive design method.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract alternates between 'resilience' (title) and 'resiliency' (text); consistent terminology should be adopted throughout.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will revise the paper to strengthen the mathematical support for the 3R framework.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the three models together 'enable optimal design and operation' is unsupported because no objective functions, coverage or detection-probability equations, sensor-performance parameters, or coupling constraints are supplied; each model is stated only to 'determine' or 'identify' requirements without showing how those outputs become inputs to a joint optimization procedure.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the abstract's claim regarding optimal design and operation is not supported by explicit mathematical details in the current version. The manuscript provides a conceptual description of each model's role but does not include objective functions, coverage or detection-probability equations, sensor-performance parameters, or coupling constraints. We will revise the abstract and expand the methods section to supply these elements and demonstrate how the model outputs feed into a joint optimization procedure. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Framework description] Framework description: the reliability, robustness, and resilience models are presented as separate constructs with no explicit integration mechanism (e.g., sequential constraints, shared decision variables, or a combined objective) that would turn the three into a single prescriptive design method.

    Authors: The referee correctly observes that the models are described as distinct constructs without an explicit integration mechanism. While the manuscript positions the 3R framework as a unified approach for sensor-network design, the current text does not detail sequential constraints, shared decision variables, or a combined objective. We will revise the framework description to introduce such a mechanism, for instance by defining a multi-stage optimization process with shared variables linking the reliability baseline to robustness margins and resilience recovery strategies. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: high-level descriptive framework with no equations or derivations

full rationale

The paper describes a 3R modeling framework at a conceptual level, outlining separate reliability, robustness, and resilience models for determining sensor requirements in normal, perturbed, and outage conditions. No equations, objective functions, fitted parameters, self-citations, or derivation chains appear in the abstract or context provided. The central claim remains a high-level taxonomy of models without any reduction of outputs to inputs by construction, making the presentation self-contained as a proposed framework rather than a closed mathematical loop.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the framework is described only at conceptual level without mathematical structure or assumptions stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5486 in / 1032 out tokens · 25214 ms · 2026-05-09T18:29:55.987398+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Benefits of Advanced Air Mobility for Society and Environment: A Case Study of Ohio,

    Dulia, E. F., Sabuj, M. S., and Shihab, S. A. M., “Benefits of Advanced Air Mobility for Society and Environment: A Case Study of Ohio,”Applied Sciences, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2021, p. 207

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Infrastructure To Support Advanced Autonomous Aircraft Technologies in Ohio: Economic Impact Report for Advanced Autonomous Aircraft Technologies in Ohio,

    Rosario, R. D., Davis, T., Dyment, M., and Cohen, K., “Infrastructure To Support Advanced Autonomous Aircraft Technologies in Ohio: Economic Impact Report for Advanced Autonomous Aircraft Technologies in Ohio,” Tech. rep., Ohio Department of Transportation, Office of Statewide Planning and Research, Columbus, OH, 2021. 20

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Open Framework Standards for Combined Aircraft Sensor Network for the State of Ohio to Detect and Track Lower Altitude Aircraft: Cost-Benefit Analysis,

    Dulia, E. F., and Shihab, S. A. M., “Open Framework Standards for Combined Aircraft Sensor Network for the State of Ohio to Detect and Track Lower Altitude Aircraft: Cost-Benefit Analysis,” Tech. rep., Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, OH, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Open Framework Standards for Combined Aircraft Sensor Network for the State of Ohio to Detect and Track Lower Altitude Aircraft,

    Calhoun, S., Adami, T., Lorenzon, J., Shihab, S., Bair, J., Wagner, E., Tanner, B., Reck, N., Runneals, D., and McCrink, M., “Open Framework Standards for Combined Aircraft Sensor Network for the State of Ohio to Detect and Track Lower Altitude Aircraft,” Tech. Rep. FHWA/OH-2023-17, Ohio Department of Transportation, Office of Statewide Planning and Resea...

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    A.,Reliability Engineering, Wiley, 2012

    Elsayed, E. A.,Reliability Engineering, Wiley, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119665946

    work page doi:10.1002/9781119665946 2012

  6. [6]

    E., and Proschan, F.,Statistical Theory of Reliability and Life Testing, Springer, 1996

    Barlow, R. E., and Proschan, F.,Statistical Theory of Reliability and Life Testing, Springer, 1996

    work page 1996

  7. [7]

    Modarres, M., Kaminskiy, M., and Krivtsov, V.,Reliability Engineering and Risk Analysis: A Practical Guide, 3rd ed., CRC Press, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Ben-Tal, A., El Ghaoui, L., and Nemirovski, A.,Robust Optimization, Princeton University Press, 2009

    work page 2009

  9. [9]

    Robust Design of Complex Systems,

    Hale, J., et al., “Robust Design of Complex Systems,”Systems Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2006, pp. 183–197

    work page 2006

  10. [10]

    H.,Signals and Boundaries: Building Blocks for Complex Adaptive Systems, MIT Press, 2003

    Holland, J. H.,Signals and Boundaries: Building Blocks for Complex Adaptive Systems, MIT Press, 2003

    work page 2003

  11. [11]

    A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities,

    Bruneau, M., Chang, S. E., Eguchi, R. T., Lee, G. C., O’Rourke, T. D., Reinhorn, A. M., Shinozuka, M., Tierney, K., Wallace, W. A., and Winterfeldt, D. v., “A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2003, pp. 733–752

    work page 2003

  12. [12]

    Resilience of Infrastructure Systems: A Systematic Review,

    Francis, R., and Bekera, B., “Resilience of Infrastructure Systems: A Systematic Review,”Natural Hazards Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2018, p. 04017018

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    DesigningaSurveillanceSensorNetworkwithInformationClearinghouseforAdvancedAir Mobility,

    Dulia,E.F.,andShihab,S.A.M.,“DesigningaSurveillanceSensorNetworkwithInformationClearinghouseforAdvancedAir Mobility,”Sensors, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2024, p. 803. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24030803, URL https://doi.org/10.3390/s24030803, author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Submission received: 11 December 2023 / Revised: 12 January 2024 / Accepted:...

    work page doi:10.3390/s24030803 2024

  14. [14]

    Geographic Information System: Principles and Applications,

    Reddy, G. P. O., “Geographic Information System: Principles and Applications,”Geospatial Technologies in Land Resources Mapping, Monitoring and Management, Geotechnologies and the Environment, Vol. 21, edited by G. Reddy and S. Singh, Springer, Cham, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78711-4_3, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78711-4_3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-78711-4_3 2018

  15. [15]

    A.,Basics of Geomatics, Springer, 2009

    Gomarasca, M. A.,Basics of Geomatics, Springer, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-010-0029-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s12518-010-0029-6 2009

  16. [16]

    deBerg,M.,Cheong,O.,vanKreveld,M.,andOvermars,M.,Computational Geometry: Algorithms and Applications,Springer,

    work page

  17. [17]

    https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77974-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77974-2

  18. [18]

    F.,GIS: A Computing Perspective, 3 rd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2023

    Duckham, M., Sun, Q., and Worboys, M. F.,GIS: A Computing Perspective, 3 rd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429168093

    work page doi:10.1201/9780429168093 2023

  19. [19]

    Springer, Cham, Switzerland,10.1007/978-3-030-11214-1

    Pierce, A. D.,Acoustics: An Introduction to Its Physical Principles and Applications, Springer, 2019. https://doi.org/https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11214-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-11214-1 2019

  20. [20]

    E., Frey, A

    Kinsler, L. E., Frey, A. R., Coppens, A. B., and Sanders, J. V.,Fundamentals of Acoustics, Wiley, 2000. https://doi.org/https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51202-6_1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-51202-6_1 2000

  21. [21]

    ISO 9613-2: Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors,

    “ISO 9613-2: Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors,” , 1996

    work page 1996

  22. [22]

    M.,Computational Atmospheric Acoustics, Springer, 2001

    Salomons, E. M.,Computational Atmospheric Acoustics, Springer, 2001. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010- 0660-6

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-010- 2001

  23. [23]

    M., and Horoshenkov, K.,Predicting Outdoor Sound, CRC Press, 2007

    Attenborough, K., Li, K. M., and Horoshenkov, K.,Predicting Outdoor Sound, CRC Press, 2007. https://doi.org/https: //doi.org/10.1201/9780429470806

    work page doi:10.1201/9780429470806 2007

  24. [24]

    Numerical wave propagation in complex acoustical environments using hybrid wave-based and geometrical acoustics methods,

    Gkanos, K., Hafsteinsson, H., Thrastarson, S., Guðjónsson, S., and Pedersen, J., “Numerical wave propagation in complex acoustical environments using hybrid wave-based and geometrical acoustics methods,”Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2025, p. 015004. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1121/2.0002059. 21

    work page doi:10.1121/2.0002059 2025

  25. [25]

    The National Map Downloader (TNM Download v2),

    U.S. Geological Survey, “The National Map Downloader (TNM Download v2),” , 2025. URL https://apps.nationalmap.gov/ downloader/, accessed October 2025

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Infrastructure to Support Advanced Autonomous Aircraft Technologies in Ohio: Economic Impact Report,

    Rosario, R. D., Davis, T., Dyment, M., and Cohen, K., “Infrastructure to Support Advanced Autonomous Aircraft Technologies in Ohio: Economic Impact Report,” , 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Time of Day and Day of Week Trends in EMS Demand,

    Cantwell, K., Morgans, A., Smith, K., Livingston, M., Spelman, T., and Dietze, P., “Time of Day and Day of Week Trends in EMS Demand,”Prehospital Emergency Care, 2015

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    Transport Ohio: Statewide Freight Plan,

    Ohio Department of Transportation, “Transport Ohio: Statewide Freight Plan,” , 2023. URL https://www.transportation.ohio. gov/programs/transport-ohio

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Traffic Forecasting Methodologies Manual,

    Ohio Department of Transportation, “Traffic Forecasting Methodologies Manual,” , 2018

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    Wind and Temperature Effects on Sound Propagation,

    Hannah, L., “Wind and Temperature Effects on Sound Propagation,”New Zealand Acoustics, Vol. 20, 2007, pp. 22–29

    work page 2007

  31. [31]

    Development of an Acoustic System for UAV Detection,

    Dumitrescu, C., Minea, M., Costea, I. M., Chiva, I. C., and Semenescu, A., “Development of an Acoustic System for UAV Detection,”Sensors, Vol. 20, No. 17, 2020

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Reliability, Robustness, and Resilience Modeling for Surveillance Systems in Advanced Air Mobility Operations,

    Dulia, E. F., Adams, C., Shihab, S. A. M., and Del Rosario, R., “Reliability, Robustness, and Resilience Modeling for Surveillance Systems in Advanced Air Mobility Operations,”AIAA Aviation Forum and ASCEND 2026, 2026. Accepted. 22

    work page 2026