Achieving a Decision Paradigm for Distributed Warfare Resource Management

Achieving a Decision Paradigm for

Distributed Warfare Resource Management

Bonnie Young

Naval Postgraduate SchoolProfessor, Systems Engineering

[email protected]

A Complex Decision Space

What makes the Decision Space Complex?

• Time-criticality• Threat complexity• Prioritization of operational objectives• Limits to situational awareness• Changing nature of operation• Distribution and heterogeneity of

warfare assets• Command and control complexity

SurveillanceCombat ID

Boost PhaseDetection

IlluminateTarget

EnhanceSituationalAwareness

Track Quality

Fieldof View

Fire ControlSupport

Satellite-basedSensors Passive Sonar LiDAR

SyntheticAperture

Radar

X-bandRadar

UAV Sensors

InfraredSearch & TrackShip-based

RadarSensor

Missions Active SonarHyperspectral

Imaging

Types ofSensors

RangingWeather

Sensor Configuration

PlatformConsiderations

SensorGeometry

Day or Night

Sensor Status

Fieldof View

SensorLocation

SensorConstraints

SensorHealth

Sensor ResourcesLeading to Decision Complexity

SurveillanceCombat ID

Boost PhaseDetection

IlluminateTarget

EnhanceSituationalAwareness

Track Quality

Fieldof View

Fire ControlSupport

Satellite-basedSensors Passive Sonar LiDAR

SyntheticAperture

Radar

X-bandRadar

UAV Sensors

InfraredSearch & TrackShip-based

RadarSensor

Missions Active SonarHyperspectral

Imaging

Types ofSensors

RangingWeather

Sensor Configuration

PlatformConsiderations

SensorGeometry

Day or Night

Sensor Status

Fieldof View

SensorLocation

SensorConstraints

SensorHealth

Warfare ResourcesLeading to Decision Complexity

Weapons

WeaponsPlatforms

Comms

PlatformsComms

Over-Arching Objective

• To most effectively use warfare resources to meet tactical operational objectives

Strategies• Use warfare resources collaboratively as

Systems of Systems (SoS)• Use an NCW approach to network distributed

assets• Achieve situational awareness to support

resource tasking/operations• Fuse data from multiple sources• Employ common processes across distributed

warfare resources• Use decision-aids to support C2

ExternalResource

Management

Level 0Processing

Signal/Feature

assessment

Level 1Processing

Entityassessmen

t

Level 2Processing

Situationassessmen

t

Level 3Processing

Impactassessmen

t

Level 4Processing

Processassessmen

t

Database management system

SupportDatabase

FusionDatabase

Human/ComputerInterface

Distributed

Local

IntelEW

SonarRadar

.

.

.Databases

Data Fusion Domain

Sources

JDL Data Fusion Model:Data-Centric Framework

9

Functionality of the 4 Levels

ResourceManagement(includes level 4

Processing)

Human/Computer Interface

Weapons

Platforms

Comms

Shift to a Decision-Centric Framework

ResourcePicture

C2Picture

Data Fusion

Processes

WeaponsWarfighting

Units

Resource Management

EnvironmentPicture

OperationalPicture

Wargaming(Event/

Consequence Prediction)

Mission/Threat Assessment & Prioritization

Weather/Mapping/

Intel Sources

CommunicationsSensors

Commanders &Operators

Warfare Resources

Decision Engine• Translate prioritized COA actions into resource tasks• Generate allocation options and select optimum• Issue tasks to warfare resources

Conceptual RM Capability• Architecture Considerations

– Distributed RM “instances”– Synchronization– Hybrid: dummy C2 nodes and RM C2 nodes

• Continuous On-going RM Process– Operational situation/missions are changing– Decision assessments must change in response—instead of

a single assessment• Level of Automation

– How much of the RM concept is automated?– RM is a decision-aid– Human C2 decision-makers must be able to manipulate

information, prioritizations, and taskings

Applying Systems Engineering Methods to Distributed Resource

Management

• An analogy exists between the SE design process and operational C2 decisions

“Risk”Decision Confidence Engine

Resource Management Decision Assessments

“Cost”Decision Cost Engine

PerformanceOMOE Decision Engine

System1

System2

System3

System4

System5

System6

System7

System8

System9

SoS 1SoS 2

SoS 3

SoS 4

SoS 5

System1

System2

System3

System4

System5

System6

System7

System8

System9

Task1

Task2

Task3

Task4

Task5

Task6

Task7

Task8

Task9

Task10

Task11

Examples of Resource Tasking

Option 1Option 2

MOE = Σ wi MOPi

OMOE = Σ wi MOEi

OMOE

MOEs

MOPs

SubsystemTechnical

Parameters(TPs)

OverallOperational Environment

System/SoS

Missions

Measuring System Effectiveness & Performance

Provide Situational Awareness

Provide Area of Interest (AOI)Surveillance Coverage

Detect and track fast-moving objectsof interest

Correctly identify objects of interest

Provide sensor coverage during day and night

Field of view (FOV)

Search volume

Range

Task turn around time

Scan speed

Search pattern

Time in sensor view prior to ident.

Dwell time

Sensor accuracy

Sensor alignmenttargets

Sensor processing

Range of identification

System OMOE

System MOE’s

System MOP’sDaytime capability

Nighttime capability

Examples of Performance Measures

SoSOMOE

System1 System

2

System3

System4

System5

SoS

W1*MOE1

W2*MOE2

Wn*MOEn

W5*MOE5

W4*MOE4

W3*MOE3

.

.

.

W1*MOPS1

W2*MOPS2

W1*MOPS1

W2*MOPS3

W1*MOPS3

W2*MOPS5

W1*MOPS2W2*MOPS3W3*MOPS4W1*MOPS3

W2*MOPS5

W1*MOPS1

W2*MOPSn

SoS MOE = Σ wi MOPi (Note – these are System MOPs)

SoS OMOE = Σ wi MOEi (Note – these are SoS MOEs)

Hierarchy of PerformanceEffectiveness

Mission 1

Mission 2

Mission 3

Mission 4

Mission 5

WarfareResourcesTaskingAlternative 1



Cost Considerations for Resource Management

• Operational Costs – defensive weapons, fuel, power

• Maintenance Costs (due to usage) – preventive maintenance, spares, repairs

• Safety Costs – manned vs. unmanned

Remember! For RM, the systems are already developed and paid for—so cost is treated differently

Decision Cost Engine Concept

• Provides methods to quantitatively represent the cost associated with the use of each warfare resource

• May provide relative cost levels or values

• Relative values are used to further refine the overall relative ranking of resource tasking decision alternatives

Decision Cost Engine: 3 Concepts

1. “After the fact” – shifting OMOE scores up or down based on relative cost levels

2. “Red Flag” – associating an “identifier” with very costly warfare resources to highlight decision alternatives that include their use

3. “Hierarchical Weightings” – the most comprehensive approach would assign cost ratings to all resources and weightings to compute an overall “cost” for each decision option

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1OMOE vs Cost

RM Decision Al-ternatives

Cost

OMOE

Ideal Point

AB

C

Combining Performance and Cost Assessments

Decision Confidence Engine• Determines a “level of confidence” associated

with each resource tasking option

• Based on:– Information reliability (or “goodness”)– Data fusion performance– Sensor error– Communication error– Computational error– Mis-associations, incorrect identifications, dropped

tracks, poor track quality, etc.

Sources of Decision Error• Sensor Observations (SO)• Communications (C)• Data Fusion Processing (DFP)• Association (A)• Attribution (At)• Identification (Id)• Threat Prioritization (TP)• Mission Identification/Prioritization (MP)• Resource Information (Health, Status, Configuration, Location, etc.) (RI)

Notional Decision Confidence Level:PDecision Accuracy = PSO * PC * PDFP * PA * PAt * PId * PTP * PMP * PRI

Decision Confidence Engine (continued)

• Hierarchical probability model – that includes all possible sources of error

• As the operational situation changes, model is updates with error estimates

• Errors are summed hierarchically to calculate an overall confidence level for each resource tasking option

Decision Assessment for System DesignSystem is in design phaseTo select the most operationally effective designSingle decisionProjected performance against operational mission requirementsCost in terms of estimated $ for acquisition and total lifecycleRisk in terms of ability to meet requirements

Decision Assessment for RM OperationsSystems are in operationTo select the most operationally effective SoS/resource taskingContinuum of decisionsProjected performance against actual operational missions/threatsCost in terms of known cost to operate & maintain; safetyRisk in terms of decision uncertainty or level of confidence

Summary(comparison of Systems Engineering Assessment

with Resource Management)

Conclusions• A decision framework providing decision assessment

methodologies can address the complexity involved in effective resource management for tactical operations.

• Applications from Systems Engineering provide methods for operational performance, cost, and risk assessments of resource tasking alternatives.

• Future command and control stands to benefit from adopting a decision paradigm in addition to the traditional data-focused perspective.

Future Work• Objective hierarchy modeling• Techniques for generating resource

tasking alternatives• Continued development of the OMOE

decision engine, cost decision engine, and decision confidence engine

• Designing warfare resources with an emphasis on being “taskable” and have “multiple uses”

Achieving a Decision Paradigm for Distributed Warfare Resource Management

Documents

Transcript of Achieving a Decision Paradigm for Distributed Warfare Resource Management