RTI Tools AMG

1
Advances in Decision ModelingThe DMSO Vector
Lt Col Eileen A. Bjorkman Chief, Concepts
Application Division Zach Furness C4I Program
Manager
31 July 2001 C2 Decision Making Workshop
2
Overview

• Challenges in Modeling C2 Processes and Decision
  Making
• DMSO Role in Decision Modeling/Human Behavior
  Representation
• The Role of C4I-Sim Interoperability in
  Supporting Integration of Decision Aids

3
Some Issues to Consider in Improving the
Representation of C2 Decisions in Simulations

• How is the simulation (such as JWARS) intended to
  be used?
• Force Assessment?
• Planning and Execution?
• Campaign-level planning and OPLAN generation?
• Course of Action analysis?
• System effectiveness and trade-off analysis?
• Concept and Doctrine development and assessment?
• What degree of resolution of the C2 process is
  necessary for the intended application?
• Deterministic or stochastic representation?
• Is it more important to understand the
  cause/effect relationship between events in the
  decision chain (deterministic), or the overall
  aggregate effects of many possible variables
  (stochastic)?
• Usability of a simulation with high-fidelity
  representation of C2
• More detail could lead to greater difficulty in
  initializing, executing, and analyzing the
  results from the simulation

4
Some Challenges in Improving the Representation
of C2 Decision Making in Simulation

• How do we capture knowledge about the current C2
  Decision Process?
• Identifying Information flows within C2 systems
• Determining sources of raw data (sensors,
  reports, etc.)
• Understanding how data is integrated into
  products presented to commanders
• Determining the factors influencing timely
  delivery and accuracy of information (signal
  degradation, weather, spoofing, etc.)
• How do senior leaders make decisions (and how do
  we capture this)?
• Filtering by staffs
• Personality differences
• Organizational filters and doctrine
• Understanding of Commanders intent

5
Some Challenges with Utilizing Automated Decision
Aids as part of C2 Decision Process

• How should decision aids be integrated into
  operational architecture?
• Tactical, operational, and/or strategy levels?
• What types of decision aids are most important at
  each level?
• Dont need a theater-level simulation at
  battalion level
• How should decision aids be integrated into C2
  system architectures?
• Embedded within C2 systems?
• External to C2 systems?
• Relationship to DII COE?

6
DMSO Role in HBR
DMSO Vision Lead and integrate the DoDs MS
community and leverage MS science and technology
advances to ensure that the warfighters of today
and tomorrow have superior and affordable MS
tools, products, and capabilities to support
their missions and to give them revolutionary
war-winning capabilities.
HBR Vision To enhance warfighter decisions by
enabling valid models using credible data that
reflect realistic human behavior.
Focus is on enhancing reuse and interoperability
of human behavior and performance models.
7
Proposed DoD Roadmap
DMSO Lead
Service/Agency Leads

• Justify the need for HBR
• Develop HBR requirements process
• Develop VVA processes and metrics for measuring
  HBR effectiveness
• Develop a Common Human Behavior Representation
  and Interchange System (CHRIS)
• Develop common tools

• Develop specific applications
• Collect domain knowledge
• Collect domain data
• Validate models and data
• Develop tools

8
The Role of C4I-Sim Interoperability in
Supporting Integration of Decision Aids

• Over past several years, simulation is
  increasingly employed to support C2 Decision
  making
• Several simulation tools already employed
  directly in support of operations in most Unified
  Commands
• TACWAR
• Thunder
• Integrated Theater Engagement Model (ITEM)
• Naval Simulation System (NSS)
• Simulation currently used in multiple ways during
  operations
• Formulating and assessing courses of action
  (COAs)
• Part of the deliberate planning process
• Current shortfalls in using these simulations for
  operations analysis
• Are not well integrated into C4I systems
• Manual entry of data required from C4I systems
• Limited ability to export results into C4I
  systems
• Often require significant hardware and manning to
  run
• Cannot anticipate potential problems in
  operations and alert commanders

9
Current DMSO Efforts Geared Toward Improving C2
Decision Making using Simulation

• NSS-GCCS
• Automated initialization of the Naval Simulation
  System (NSS) using data available in the Global
  Command and Control System (GCCS) for rapid
  execution of course of action (COA) analyses
• Successfully used by NAVFOR cell during Global 01
  (July 2001)
• Reduced the amount of time necessary for
  initializing NSS COA scenarios from over 4 hours
  (Global 00) to under 20 minutes (Global 01)
• ITEM-GCCS
• Automated initialization of the Integrated
  Theater Engagement Model (ITEM), based on the
  existing NSS-GCCS linkage
• Planned for use in USFK exercises (RSOI, UFL) in
  2002
• Will be used by planning and analysis staffs - no
  simulation augmentees
• JSIMS-JWARS Study
• IDA Study that is assessing the utility of
  linkages between JWARS, C4I systems (such as
  GCCS) and JSIMS
• Addressing the question, Would interoperability
  of these systems be beneficial to the
  warfighter?
• Includes use cases involving JWARS as a decision
  support tool in JSIMS driven exercises

10
Future Areas of Interest in C4I-Sim
Interoperability in Support of C2 Decision
Processes

• Reachback Analysis
• Provide capability for initialization of
  simulations and decision support tools out of
  theater and in CONUS, during operations
• GCCS-K linkages to ELIST (TRANSCOM) and NSS
  (PACOM)?
• Alert Capability
• Execute an OPLAN within a campaign-level
  simulation (JWARS?) and run in real-time with the
  operation
• Processes would constantly monitor the state of
  units in the C4I system and compare to the
  expected state in the simulation
• Command staffs would be alerted to significant
  deviations from the simulated OPLAN
• Collaborative Planning
• Use a federation of simulations to
  collaboratively build an OPLAN
• Use campaign-level simulation for general OPLAN
• Use higher resolution functional models
  (logistics, communications, intelligence, etc) to
  determine ability to support overall OPLAN and
  modify the plan as necessary

11
Summary

• DMSO can provide leadership, integration, and
  leveraging in the modeling of military decision
  making processes and human behavior
• Standards
• Infrastructure
• Services and agencies provide specific
  applications
• C4I-Simulation Interoperability is a key enabler
  for using decision support tools on the
  battlefield
• Representation of C2 Decision processes is
  important, but figuring out how to use such tools
  within the process is equally important
• Just scratching the surface in terms of
  integrating decision aids into the C2 decision
  process