journal article·2026-06-20Open access

Integrating Predictive Simulation into the OODA Loop: A Novel Framework for Polar Ship Flooding Emergency Decision-Making

Jiahe Wang, Yue Hou, Kangbo Wang, Bo Wang, Jianwei Huang

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 12

Abstract

To address the critical safety challenges of flooding induced by ship–ice collisions in Arctic shipping routes, this study proposes an Observe–Orient–Predict–Decide–Act (OODA-P)-enhanced closed-loop intelligent damage control decision-support framework integrated with predictive simulation. To address the limitations of existing systems—namely, weak polar adaptability and the absence of a decision feedback loop—this research presents three core findings: (1) A fast time-domain floating condition model was developed by coupling topside icing with progressive flooding. Numerical simulations indicate that neglecting ice accretion leads to an underestimation of the long-term heel angle and transverse stability by 4.4% and 4.5%, respectively, validating the necessity of incorporating coupled ice loads. (2) A serial dual-channel prediction and evaluation mechanism, integrating “situation evolution prediction” and “decision efficacy evaluation,” was designed. This mechanism can proactively forecast long-term deterioration trends in the floating condition within 0.3147 s of acquiring damage information, capable of identifying and flagging potentially high-risk emergency plans before their execution, thus preventing adverse outcomes. (3) The proposed framework was validated through typical polar scenarios and 111 damage control training sessions across three batches, with the full-loop logic flow completing in under 3 s. Compared with the traditional OODA loop, the average emergency response time was reduced from 26.9 to 22.7 min (a 15.5% reduction), while the initial response success rate improved from 74.7% to 97.3% in a simulated training environment. By enabling “virtual trial-and-error” prior to execution, this framework demonstrates the potential to augment traditional experience-based damage control with proactive, simulation-driven decision support, marking a step towards more intelligent interventions. Through the explicit coupling of topside icing and progressive flooding into real-time predictions, this work provides a foundation for further development of polar-adaptable intelligent damage control systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics · Icing and De-icing Technologies · Maritime Navigation and Safety

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan 430033, China

China Coast Guard Academy, Ningbo 315801, China

References (35)

Show source-provided references
1. Arctic Sea Route access reshapes global shipping carbon emissions10.1038/s41467-025-64437-4 ↗
2. Maritime shipping in the arctic: Challenges and opportunities to improve safety must be reflected in the state’s transport policy
3. Martins, P.T., and Lobo, V.S. (2011, January 13–16). Real-Time decision support system for managing ship stability under damage. Proceedings of the OCEANS 2011 IEEE-Spain, Madrid, Spain.10.1109/Oceans-Spain.2011.6003643 ↗
4. Wang, B., Hou, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, K., and Huang, J. (2025). Digital Twin framework for predictive simulation and decision support in ship damage control. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 13.10.3390/jmse13122348 ↗
5. Rodrigues, J.M. (2024). A review of methods for modelling flooding, its progression and outcome in damaged ships. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 12.10.3390/jmse12020251 ↗
6. Adaptive time step in simulation of progressive flooding10.1016/j.oceaneng.2013.12.014 ↗
7. Braidotti, L., and Mauro, F. (2020). A fast algorithm for onboard progressive flooding simulation. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 8.10.3390/jmse8050369 ↗
8. Braidotti, L., Prpić-Oršić, J., Bertagna, S., and Bucci, V. (2024). A consolidated linearised progressive flooding simulation method for onboard decision support. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 12.10.3390/jmse12081367 ↗
9. A case-based decision support system for flooding crises onboard ships10.1002/qre.748 ↗
10. Kang, H.J., Choi, J., Yim, G.T., and Ahn, H. (2017, January 2–7). Time domain decision-making support based on ship behavior monitoring and flooding simulation database for on-board damage control. Proceedings of the ISOPE International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA.
11. A knowledge-based decision support system for shipboard damage control10.1016/j.eswa.2012.01.146 ↗
12. Pennanen, P., Ruponen, P., and Ramm-Schmidt, H. (2015). Integrated decision support system for increased passenger ship safety. Damaged Ship III, Royal Institution of Naval Architects.10.3940/rina.ds.2015.07 ↗
13. Louvros, P., Stefanidis, F., Boulougouris, E., Komianos, A., and Vassalos, D. (2023). Machine learning and case-based reasoning for real-time onboard prediction of the survivability of ships. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 11.10.3390/jmse11050890 ↗
14. On-board decision support system for ship flooding emergency response10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.154 ↗
15. Performance-based on-board damage control system for ships10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.108636 ↗
16. AM–H method-based decision support system for flooding emergencies onboard warship10.1016/j.oceaneng.2012.10.012 ↗
17. Acquisition method of evaluation stress for the digital twin model of ship monitoring structure10.1016/j.apor.2022.103368 ↗
18. Impact mechanism and prediction methods of harsh environmental factors on typical wave-induced icing during polar ship navigation10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.120409 ↗
19. Li, F., and Huang, L. (2022). A review of computational simulation methods for a ship advancing in broken ice. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 10.10.3390/jmse10020165 ↗
20. Experimental Investigation of Vertical Marine Surface Icing in Periodic Spray and Cold Conditions
21. Speranzon, A., Debrunner, C.H., Rosenbluth, D., Castillo-Effen, M.C., Nowicki, A.R., Alcedo, K., and Banaszuk, A. (2023, January 12–13). Challenge problems in developing a neuro-symbolic OODA loop. Proceedings of the Workshop on Neural-Symbolic Learning and Reasoning (NeSy), London, UK.
22. OODA loop for learning open-world novelty problems10.1016/bs.adcom.2023.06.002 ↗
23. MCD-YOLO: An improved YOLOv8-based approach for surface defect detection of marine machinery components10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.122624 ↗
24. Dong, X., Yuan, J., and Dai, J. (2025). Study on lightweight bridge crack detection algorithm based on YOLO11. Sensors, 25.10.3390/s25113276 ↗
25. A high-frequency low-cost technique for measuring small-scale water level fluctuations using computer vision10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109477 ↗
26. Ice accretion for ships and offshore structures. Part 1-State of the art review10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.111501 ↗
27. Estimate of the content of spray-drops in the near-water layer of the atmosphere
28. Han, Y.X. (2021). Research on Damaged Stability of Ships Navigating in the Arctic. [Master’s Thesis, Dalian University of Technology].
29. Braidotti, L., Prpić-Oršić, J., Utzeri, S., Bucci, V., and Marinò, A. (2022). Fast estimation of the time-to-flood on simple geometries. Technology and Science for the Ships of the Future: Proceedings of NAV 2022: 20th International Conference on Ship & Maritime Research, Rome, Italy, 14–16 June 2022, SAGE Publications.10.3233/PMST220066 ↗
30. Theoretical efficiency of the Edmonds-Karp algorithm for computing maximal flows10.1145/321679.321693 ↗
31. Piperakis, A.S. (2013). An Integrated Approach to Naval Ship Survivability in Preliminary Ship Design. [Ph.D. Thesis, UCL (University College London)].
32. DNV GL (2015). Winterization for Cold Climate Operations, DNV GL AS. Available online: https://studylib.net/doc/25863228/dnvgl-os-a201.
33. Functional Nonlinear Model Predictive Control Based on Adaptive Dynamic Programming10.1109/TCYB.2018.2859801 ↗
34. Risk assessment of the operations of maritime autonomous surface ships10.1016/j.ress.2020.107324 ↗
35. MPC-based motion planning and control enables smarter and safer autonomous marine vehicles: Perspectives and a tutorial survey10.1109/JAS.2022.106016 ↗