HLA Policy and Process Training Module

1
Conceptual Modeling- How do we do it?-A
practical example
Jack Jake Borah Senior Systems Engineer The
AEgis Technologies Group Inc. jborah_at_aegistg.com
2
Where Do We Go Now?

• Limited of Authoritative Reference Material on
  how to do Conceptual Modeling as a part of
  Simulation Development
• Conceptual Modeling is not a term discussed in
  modeling and simulation textbooks
• Web searches on Conceptual Modeling have led to
  a diverse set of web sites that contributed
  little if anything the body of knowledge
• Most often Conceptual Modeling was in relation
  to Database Modeling

3
The Answer- A SISO Study Group

• The audience feedback from the Spring SIW paper
  was that a Study Group was needed
• SISO Policies and Procedures states that the
  EXCOM may establish Study Groups to consider
  specific issues and to provide recommendations
  concerning proposed courses of action
• Study groups shall operate under specific Terms
  of Reference that identify the issues and the
  specific questions that need to be addressed.

4
Where we are now

• The Terms of Reference have been approved for a
  Simulation Conceptual Model Study Group
• The First Meeting is now
• One of the first actions is to perform a data
  call for relevant conceptual modeling experiences
• The presentation of this paper is an initial
  response

5
What we want to know about the Conceptual Modeling

• Who did the modeling?
• What was modeled?
• How is was modeled?
• Why it was modeled?
• What was learned?

6
A Ballistic Missile HWIL Simulation

• Who did the modeling? Jake Borah and team from
  AEgis Technologies
• What was modeled? The System Representational and
  Executive Components
• How is was modeled? In an evolutionary manner
  being with a customer suggested tabular format
  and progressing to Rational Rose UML models
• Why it was modeled? The customer wants to use
  conceptual models to manage future simulation
  system requirements

7
A Ballistic Missile Parallel Discrete Event
Simulation

• Who did the modeling? Jake Borah and team from
  AEgis Technologies
• What was modeled? The System Representational and
  Executive Components
• How is was modeled? In an evolutionary manner
  being with a customer suggested tabular format
  and progressing to Rational Rose UML models
• Why it was modeled? The customer wants to use
  conceptual models to manage future simulation
  system requirements

8
What was Learned?

• Conceptual Model Requirements must be set early
• No single customer
• Simulation Product Leads vs VVA advisors
• Diverse requirements for CM
• Requirement to have a CM set by sponsor but
  imprecisely defined for customer
• CM to be used as part of future requirements
  management process
• CM needed to reflect existing simulation
• The Why, without being the How.

9
What was Learned?

• Conceptual Model Development Process must be
  defined
• Customer has no standing development process
• Developer using iterative (breadth then depth )
  process to refine customer requirements and
  obtain customer buy-in a
• Review and comment problematic
• Drafts submitted
• Little or no constructive feedback provided

10
What was Learned?

• Developer must educated Customer on CM
• Vague guidance on Product format
• Tabular, Document, UML model
• Unrealistic specification of CM tools
• Compatible with Office suite
• Unrealistic expectations of time and resources
  required
• Initially customer specified legacy system fast
  as possible
• Shifted to next generation of MS requirements as
  fast as possible
• Now when possible for legacy system

11
Tabular Model
12
Document Format
13
UML Diagram
14
Conclusions

• Reverse Engineering a legacy model is deceptively
  hard
• Attempted due to the false assumption that
  adequate and credible documentation exists
• Violate Basic Systems Engineering Practices at
  your own considerable Risk!
• Product Requirements Management
• Customer Expectations and Buy-in