effects based operations (ebo) - apps.dtic.mil .effects based operations, ebo, monte carlo...

Download EFFECTS BASED OPERATIONS (EBO) - apps.dtic.mil .Effects Based Operations, EBO, Monte Carlo Simulation,

Post on 09-Feb-2019

213 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

AFRL-IF-RS-TR-2005-322 Final Technical Report September 2005 EFFECTS BASED OPERATIONS (EBO) University of Massachusetts

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED.

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY INFORMATION DIRECTORATE

ROME RESEARCH SITE ROME, NEW YORK

STINFO FINAL REPORT This report has been reviewed by the Air Force Research Laboratory, Information Directorate, Public Affairs Office (IFOIPA) and is releasable to the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). At NTIS it will be releasable to the general public, including foreign nations. AFRL-IF-RS-TR-2005-322 has been reviewed and is approved for publication APPROVED: /s/

DUANE GILMOUR Project Engineer

FOR THE DIRECTOR: /s/

JAMES A. COLLINS, Deputy Chief Advanced Computing Division Information Directorate

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 074-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)

2. REPORT DATESEPTEMBER 2005

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Final Sep 01 Aug 04

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE EFFECTS BASED OPERATIONS (EBO)

6. AUTHOR(S) Paul R. Cohen

5. FUNDING NUMBERS C - F30602-01-1-0589 PE - 62702F PR - 558B TA - II WU - 03

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) University of Massachusetts Computer Science Department Experimental Knowledge Systems Laboratory Amherst Massachusetts 01003

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER

N/A

9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Air Force Research Laboratory/IFTC 26 Electronic Parkway Rome New York 13441-4514

10. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

AFRL-IF-RS-TR-2005-322

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES AFRL Project Engineer: Duane Gilmour/IFTC/(315) 330-3550/ Duane.Gilmour@rl.af.mil

12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED.

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 Words) Several parts of an integrated decision aid for Effects Based Operations (EBO) were designed and implemented. These extensive improvements to the Capture the Flag (CtF) wargaming system included a new declarative executable action specification language (Tapir) and simulation definition language (Krill); improved models of morale and defeat (Defeat Mechanisms); and a semi-graphical Action Model language. Combined, these pieces help to create models that can be used to evaluate Courses of Action (COAs) for EBO and other military operations. Effects based reasoning requires models of effects. These must distinguish physical from behavioral effects and physical structures from mental ones. Many effects are hidden and cannot be measured directly, especially effects on mental structures and behaviors. While physical effects, such as dropping a bridge can be confirmed, effects on morale, courage, and other intentional states can only be inferred from observable indicators, and will generally be uncertain. The original CtF system modeled only physical force on force conflict. The new Action Models and Defeat Mechanisms provide CtF with a much broader range of measurable effects. Krill and Tapir make it possible to describe plans and actions declaratively, while also supporting Monte Carlo simulation for the measurement of uncertain, probabilistic and dynamical events.

15. NUMBER OF PAGES58

14. SUBJECT TERMS Effects Based Operations, EBO, Monte Carlo Simulation, Wargaming, Capture The Flag, Course Of Action, COA 16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT

UNCLASSIFIED

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

UNCLASSIFIED

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT

UNCLASSIFIED

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

ULNSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18 298-102

i

Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 EXTENSIONS TO CTF: STEPS TOWARDS A COMPONENT MODEL...................................... 1

2.0.1 Tapir: A better action language................................................................................................... 5 2.0.2 No More Code: Declarative Executive Simulation ...................................................................... 8 2.0.3 Flexible Actions: Goals and the Tapir Reactive Planner............................................................. 9

2.1 CAPTURE THE FLAG IN ACTION: OPERATION NORTHAMPTON............................................................. 10 2.2 ACTIONS AND EFFECTS: ACTION MODELS.......................................................................................... 11

2.2.1 Action Model Examples ............................................................................................................. 15 3.0 DEFEAT MECHANISMS................................................................................................................... 18

3.1 HEERINGA AND COHEN MODEL.......................................................................................................... 18 3.2 SEARCHING FOR SIMPLICITY: THE BUCKET MODEL ........................................................................... 20 3.3 MODELING DEFEAT AS DISORGANIZATION......................................................................................... 22

4.0 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................... 25 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 26 APPENDIX A OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION OF CAPTURE THE FLAG (AS OF SEPTEMBER 2000) ................................................................................................................................... 27 APPENDIX B ORIGINAL CTF MOVE-TO-POINT CODE.............................................................. 32 Appendix C Tapir...36

ii

List of Figures FIGURE 1: LOS IMPLEMENTATION USING RAY TRACING ................................................................................. 3 FIGURE 2: POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH FIXED LOS GRID................................................................................ 4 FIGURE 3: ACTION BROWER SHOWING AN ATTACK BLOB WITH ARTILLERY ACTION...................................... 9 FIGURE 4: RED MILITIA AGAINST BLUE INFANTRY AND HELICOPTERS IN A SOMALIA LIKE SCENARIO ON THE

OUTSKIRTS OF NORTHAMPTON, MA .................................................................................................... 11 FIGURE 5: CLOSE UP OF NORTHAMPTON SCENARIO UNFOLDING ................................................................... 11 FIGURE 6: THE ACTION MODEL FOR DEFEAT................................................................................................ 12 FIGURE 7: FIVE POINT GRADING SCALE ......................................................................................................... 13 FIGURE 8: MASS SCALE FOR VETERAN TROOPS ............................................................................................. 14 FIGURE 9: VARIOUS TIME SCALES................................................................................................................. 15 FIGURE 10: THE ACTION MODEL FOR SCREEN .............................................................................................. 16 FIGURE 11: THE ACTION MODEL FOR BREECH.............................................................................................. 17 FIGURE 12: FEEDBACK MODEL FOR EFFECTIVE FATIGUE ............................................................................... 19 FIGURE 13: DEFEAT AS A LEAKY BUCKET...................................................................................................... 20 FIGURE 14: A COORDINATED ATTACK DESTROYS THE ENEMY....................................................................... 22 FIGURE 15: AN UNCOORDINATED ATTACK FAILS TO DESTROY THE ENEMY BECAUSE HE HAS TIME TO RECOVER

............................................................................................................................................................ 22 FIGURE 16: MODELING DEFEAT INFORMATION THEORETICALLY................................................................... 22 FIGURE 17: SINGLE LEVEL SYSTEM UNDER ATTACK. AS MORE BITS FLIP OUT OF ALIGNMENT, IT BECOMES

HARDER AND HARDER TO RECOVER. .................................................................................................... 23 FIGURE 18: A SMALL SYSTEM OF INTER-RELATED SYSTEMS.......................................................................... 24 FIGURE 19: THE RESULTS OF TWO ATTACK STRATEGIES ON A MULTI-LEVEL SYSTEM.................................... 24

1

1. Introduction The Unive

Recommended

View more >