Papers › Aircraft Conflict Resolution: A Benchmark Generator
Aircraft Conflict Resolution: A Benchmark Generator
Mercedes Pelegrin, Martina Cerulli
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Aircraft conflict resolution is one of the major tasks of computer-aided air traffic management and represents a challenging optimization problem. Many models and methods have been proposed to assist trajectory regulation to avoid conflicts. However, the question of testing the different mathematical optimization approaches against each other is still open. Standard benchmarks include unrealistic scenarios in which all the flights move toward a common point or completely random generated instances. There is a lack of a common set of test instances that allows comparison of the available methods under a variety of heterogeneous and representative scenarios. We present a flight deconfliction benchmark generator that allows the user to choose between (i) different predefined scenario inspired by existing benchmarks in the literature; (ii) pseudo-random traffic meeting certain congestion measurements; (iii) and randomly generated traffic. The proposed setting can account for different levels of difficulty in the deconfliction of the aircraft and allows to explore and compare the real limitations of optimization approaches for aircraft conflict resolution.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections