A Review and Proposal for Developing of Data Fusion
Models and Frameworks for Decision Making Systems

  • Dmitry Murashov ,
  • Alexey Krylov,
  • Valeri Zakharov 
  • a,b,c, St. Petersburg Institute for Informatics and Automation of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 14-th Linia, VI, No.
    39, St. Petersburg, 199178, Russia
Cite as
Murashov D., Krylov A., Zakharov V. (2021). A Review and Proposal for Developing of Data Fusion Models and Frameworks for Decision Making Systems. Proceedings of the 33rd European Modeling & Simulation Symposium (EMSS 2021), pp. 116-125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46354/i3m.2021.emss.016


An adequate decision making is heavily dependent on data fusion processes. The only way a decision making agent can infer a decision which is adequate to the current state of an environment is through gaining a situation awareness regarding relevant aspects of it which is achieved through data, information, and knowledge fusion. The following paper covers some of the latest proposals for frameworks and architectural approaches to building fusion-based decision making systems, both formal and conceptual. The article also proposes a new architectural approach to building more extensible fuison-based systems through adding an explicit prediction block. The motivation for that architectural solution was the blistering pace of learning-based prediction systems development witnessed by scientific and engineering communities during the last decade which brought us a plethora of well-established methods and methodologies.


  1. Avtamonov, P., Bakhmut, A., Krylov, A., Okhtilev, M., Okhtilev, P., and Sokolov, B. (2017). Application of decision support technology at various stages of the life cycle of space facilities in assembly with the information system of technical condition and re liability. VESTNIK of Samara University. Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, 16:173. 
  2. Botega, L. C., Valdir, A. P., Oliveira, A. C. M., Saran, J. F., Villas, L. A., and de Araújo, R. B. (2017). Quality aware human-driven information fusion model. In 2017 20th International Conference on Information Fu sion (Fusion), pages 1–10. 
  3. Bowman, C. (2004). A descriptive framework of workspace awareness for real-time groupware. AIAA Intelligent Systems Conference. 
  4. Chikh, A. (2011). A knowledge management frame work in software requirements engineering based on the seci model. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 04. 
  5. Endsley, M. (1995). Toward a theory of situation aware ness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Jour nal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37:32– 64. 
  6. Fridman, A. J. and Kurbanov, V. G. (2016). Information technology to integrate spatial data into the situa tional modelling system. In Yusupov, R. M., editor, SPIIRAS Proceedings. 
  7. Gutwin, C. and Greenberg, S. (2002). A descrip tive framework of workspace awareness for real time groupware. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 11:411–. 
  8. Jousselme, A.-L. and Maupin, P. (2007). Inter preted systems for situation analysis. FUSION 2007 - 2007 10th International Conference on Information Fu sion, pages 1 – 11. 
  9. Koo, B. H. Y., Simmons, W. L., and Crawley, E. F. (2009). Algebra of systems: A metalanguage for model synthesis and evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 39(3):501–513. 
  10. Mitaritonna, A., Abasolo, M. J., and Montero, F. (2019). Situational awareness through augmented reality: 3d-sa model to relate requirements, design and eval uation. In 2019 International Conference on Virtual Re ality and Visualization (ICVRV), pages 227–232. 
  11. Muccini, H. and Sharaf, M. (2017). Caps: Architec ture description of situational aware cyber physical systems. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Soft ware Architecture (ICSA), pages 211–220. 
  12. Mykich, K. and Burov, Y. (2016). Algebraic model for knowledge representation in situational awareness systems. 2016 XIth International Scientific and Techni cal Conference Computer Sciences and Information Tech nologies (CSIT), pages 165–167. 
  13. Nakanishi, H. and Black, J. (2018). Implicit and explicit knowledge in flood evacuations with a case study of takamatsu, japan. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 28:788–797. 
  14. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., and Konno, N. (2000). SECI, ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowl edge creation. Long Range Planning, 33:5–34. 
  15. Okhtilev, M., Klyucharyov, A., Okhtilev, P., and Zyanchurin, A. (2020). Technology of automated information and analytical support of the product life cycle on the example of unified virtual electronic passport of space facilities. Izvestiâ vysših učebnyh zavedenij. Priborostroenie, 63:1012–1019. 
  16. Sliva, A., Gorman, J., Bowman, C., and Voshell, M. (2015). Dual node decision wheels: an architecture for interconnected information fusion and decision making. page 94640F. 
  17. Sokolov, B., Ohtilev, M., and Yusupov, R. (2015a). Teoreticheskie i technologicheskie osnovy konceptsii proactivnogo monitoringa i upravleniya slozhnymi ob’ektami. In Izvestiya SFedU. Engineering Sciences, pages 162–174. 
  18. Sokolov, B., Pavlov, A., Yusupov, R., Ohtilev, M., and Potryasaev, S. (2015b). Theoretical and technological foundations of complex objects proactive monitoring, management and control. In Automated Systems and Technologies, pages 103–110. 
  19. Sokolov, B., Sobolevsky, V., Mikoni, S., Zakharov, V., and Rostova, E. (2018). Quality evaluation of models and polymodel complexes: Subject-object approach. pages 305–310. 
  20. Sokolov, B., Ziuban, A., Pimanov, E., Ivanov, D., Mi cony, S., and Burakov, V. (2017). Theory and practice of information fusion models’ quality estimation and models’ quality control. In Affenzeller, Bruzzone, Jiménez, Longo, and Piera, editors, Proceedings of the European Modeling and Simulation Symposium, 2017. 
  21. Steinberg, A. N., Bowman, C. L., and White, F. E. (1999). Revisions to the JDL data fusion model. In Dasarathy, B. V., editor, Sensor Fusion: Architectures, Algorithms, and Applications III, volume 3719, pages 430 – 441. International Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE. 
  22. Yang, S., Liu, Y., and Liang, M. (2018). Teachers’ per sonal knowledge management tools and application strategies exploration based on the seci model. In 2018 International Joint Conference on Information, Me dia and Engineering (ICIME), pages 341–346. 
  23. Yusof, W. S. E. Y. W., Zakaria, O., and Zainol, Z. (2016). Establishing of knowledge based framework for sit uational awareness using nonaka’s and endsley’s models. In 2016 International Conference on Informa tion and Communication Technology (ICICTM), pages 47–50.