Urban Air Mobility Conflict Resolution: Centralized or Decentralized?

This work begins to address one of the critical questions in the urban air mobility and small unmanned aircraft communities: Should the en-route conflict resolution function in an urban air mobility traffic system be centralized or decentralized? Three conflict resolution architectures are modeled and analyzed: centralized, decentralized with uniform rules, and decentralized with mixed rules. This study compares these architectures and investigates their robustness to communication and state information errors in terms of safety and efficiency metrics. Experiments are conducted using a high-fidelity Monte Carlo traffic simulator and a generic set of traffic scenarios with increasing traffic density. When no errors were modeled, the centralized architecture marginally outperformed the decentralized architecture. However, performance of the centralized architecture was found to be adversely affected by the modeled input errors to a greater degree than was the decentralized architecture. Performance of the centralized architecture also was degraded significantly by the modeled transmission errors of the centralized resolution maneuvers. In the decentralized architecture, uniform rules outperformed mixed rules because, in the mixed rules case, system safety performance was undermined and dominated by the poor performers.