Military Scenario Definition Language

1
SIW Spring 06
Keeping up with the Military Scenario Definition
LanguagePaper 06S-SIW-018Authors Rob Wittman
Jeff AbbottTuesday, April 4, 2006 (C2/MS/ANL
Track)Wednesday, April 5, 2006 (TE Track)
2
Agenda

• Introduction
• SISO Study Group Activity
• MATREX Activity
• OneSAF Objective System (OOS) Activity

3
Problems/Issues

• The close coupling of scenario development tools
  and simulations
• limits third party tool development and
• automated sharing of scenarios between
  simulations and between C4I devices.
• Assumptions, interpretations, and typos are
  introduced as Military personnel or Subject
  Matter Experts create and hand-over scenario
  products for input into specific simulations and
  C2 databases.

Simulation Scenario 1
Simulation 1
Simulation Scenario 2
Simulation 2

• DATA
• ERRORS

Military Scenario
TYPO!
4
Need For Common MSDL Specification
MSDL Formatted Documents
Simulation Scenario 1
Simulation Scenario 2
Simulation Scenario 3
Simulation 2
Simulation 3
5
MSDL Architectural Characteristics

• Separation of Code from Data
• MSDL XML Schema explicitly defines allowable data
  types, constraints, enumerations, and
  hierarchical relationships
• Use of Industry Standards
• World-Wide Web Consortium (WC3) XML
• Application Independence
• Community wide access for tools to develop or
  modify military scenarios
• Community wide access to use existing military
  scenarios
• Separation of Concerns
• MSDL focuses on military scenario information not
  on application specific, exercise control
  specific, or other simulation initialization areas

C2PC
6
MSDL High Level Design

• Military Scenario is
• Current Situation(tn)
• Course of Action(tn1)
• Military Scenario(tn)
• Core, Common and Custom scenario data
• MSDL includes Core and Common data
• MIL STD 2525B
• AUTL
• Other standards doctrine
• Custom is only included if it can be abstracted
  away through a common data model

7

• SISO Study Group

8
MSDL SISO Standardization
Product Development Group Kickoff 5 April 2006
Mtg 6 I/ITSEC Orlando 29 Nov. 2005

• MSDL SG approved by SISO in Spring, 2005
• Participants represent a wide body of interest,
  including
• Representatives from over 5 different nations
• Over 100 participants at SG meetings
• Industry, Academia, Government
• 98 participants on MSDL SG reflector
• Active coordination with C-BML SG has brought
  about harmonization of plans for Product
  Development Group (PDG)
• Product Nomination approved by SAC 27 Feb. 2006
  and EXCOM March 8, 2006

Mtg 4 George Mason Univ, VA 3 Aug. 2005 17
Participants
Mtg 2 Orlando, FL 8-10 June 2005 35 Participants
Mtg 5 Fall SIW Orlando, FL 22 Sept. 2005
Mtg 3 Euro-SIW Toulouse, France 29 June 2005 27
Participants
Mtg 1 Spring SIW San Diego, CA 6 April 2005 56
Participants
9
MSDL Study Group Vetted Products

• Domain Spreadsheet
• Definitions
• Review Process
• MSDL Specification Comment Form
• Version .01 of the MSDL Specification

Definitions
Military Scenario Scenario Study Group Universal
Joint Task List
MSDL Problem Change Request Form
MSDL Spec V .01
XML Schema Data Dictionary HTML Description
10
Execution
Initialization
C-BML
C-BML, MSDL
C4I Real
Infrastructure Software e.g. Middleware
C4I Model
Unit Model
MSDL ltInitializegt ltWhogt TANK ltWHATgtMOVE
TACTICALLY ltWHEREgt POS ltWHENgt TIME
ltEXECUTEgt A Series of C-BML orders
Intention Situation Object Signal
Soldier Model
Robotic Force
Evaluation
Tank Real
Developed by Per Gustavsson
11

• Modeling Architecture for Technology Research,
  and Experimentation (MATREX) Activity

12
MSDL-MATREX C4ISR FACT Collaboration
MSDE
CSAPT
Phase I Data Identification Phase II Interface
Development Phase III Business Rule Development
for Populating Data
HLA Control
CSAT
RC
HLA RTI
RC
RC
RC
RC
Fed 1
Fed 2
Fed 3
Fed 4
Fed 5
Fed 7
Sub-Fed
Fed 8
Fed
Fed 6
Fed 9
RC Indicates links through which remote creates
are sent. Simulation configuration data is also
sent to all federates.
13
MATREX Additions to the MSDL Schema

• Name
• Date Time Group (DTG)
• TargetList Defines the structure of a list of
  all the identified targets.
• Munitions Defines the structure of a list of all
  munitions associated with the AGM.
• WeaponTargetPairing Defines the structure of a
  list of all weapon (ammunition) target pairs.
• TargetSets Defines the structure of a list of
  target sets that identify the relative worth of
  sets of targets.

14

• OneSAF Objective System (OOS) Activity

15
One Semi-Automated Forces (OneSAF) Objective
System (OOS)

• A composable, next generation CGF
• Represent a full range of operations, systems,
  and control processes (TTP)
• Entity up to brigade level
• Variable level of fidelity
• Supports multiple Army MS domain (ACR, RDA,
  TEMO) applications.

Software only
Automated Composable Extensible Interoperable
Platform Independent

• Field to
• RDECs and Battle Labs
• National Guard armories
• Reserve training centers
• All active-duty brigades
• and battalions
• All FCS platforms

HLA DIS Capable
Capable of replacing legacy entity-based
simulations BBS, OTB/ModSAF, CCTT/AVCATT SAF,
Janus, JCATS MOUT
16
MSDL The OOS Product Line Architecture Framework
OneSAF Reuse Direction Guidance Mandated
using the CCTT Commanders Exercise
Initialization Toolkit (CEIT) as starting point
for OneSAF Military Scenario Development
Capability. MSDL Schema, example, and
presentation available at www.onesaf.org.
CAPES
C2PC
17
MSDE
18
Scenario Generation Phase Using ACSIS Generated
Data
Military Scenario (MSDL)
Training/Analysis Objectives
OOS Simulation Controller (MCT)
Environment Repository
Military Scenario Repository
Military Scenario (MSDL)
System Composition Rqts.
OOS Event Planner (MSDE)
Military Scenario Repository
Military Scenario (MSDL)
Synthetic Force Rqts.
Plan ViewTerrain
Event Planner (MSDE)
OOS C4I Adapter
Environment Rqts.

• Short-Term Plan
• Start with an ACSIS generated MSDL compliant file
  that has data consistent with a C4I Data Load.
• Import data into MCT without modification and
  create simulation specific file.
• Import data and initialize C4I Adapter .

Military Scenario
External Scenarios (for Import)
19
ACSIS Proposed Extensions to MSDL (1/2)

• PlatformRoleInstance
• URN
• Role_Name
• IpAddress
• OR_Name
• EmailAddress
• BFASystem_Type
• BFA_Version
• EPLRS_RSID
• CommunicationsNetReferences

20
ACSIS Proposed Extensions to MSDL (2/2)

• CommunicationNetReference
• CommunicationNetType
• CommunicationNetid
• UnitOwnerHandle

21
MSDL Schema 5 Ws

• Options
• Plan COA
• Who, What, When, Where, Why
• Environment
• Where, When
• Force Structure
• Who
• Task Organizations
• Who
• Installations
• Where
• Overlays
• Tactical Graphics
• Where
• MOOTW Graphics
• What, When, Where
• Threats

22
MSDL the 5Ws

• The UnitActivity element ties all this together
• Who Units
• What Task COA Handle
• When Trigger (Handle)
• Where Trigger (Handle)
• Why Task

23
MSDL Why

• The Why element is specified by the
  WhyEnumeration in the Task of a Unit Activity.
• Enumeration restricted to values from Army
  Universal Task List (AUTL)
• ActivityType restricted to C2IEDM actions type
  enumerations
• WhyEnumeration restricted to enumerations based
  on FM 101-5-1

24
MSDL Schema Refinement

• Original
• MilitaryScenario.xsd
• Units.xsd
• Equipment.xsd
• CoursesOfAction.xsd
• CommandRelations.xsd
• CommonElements.xsd
• Plan.xsd
• ForceSide.xsd
• Installations.xsd
• METOC.xsd
• MILSTD2525B.xsd
• MOOTW.xsd
• Options.xsd
• TacticalGraphics.xsd
• Threats.xsd
• Dcr.xsd

• Current
• MilitaryScenario.xsd
• UnitEnumerations.xsd
• EquipmentEnumerations.xsd
• TaskEnumerations.xsd
• msdlElements.xsd

25
Questions?

• Dr. Rob Wittman
• OneSAF Architect
• rwittman_at_mitre.org
• Jeff Abbott
• MSDE Lead
• jabbott_at_ideorlando.org