8/18/2020 DYMATICA Modeling & Assessment Current Work and Capabilities Sandia National Laboratories Department of Energy Michael Bernard, PhD P R E S E N T E D B Y Applied Cognitive Science Dept. Approved for Unclassified Unlimited Release: SAND2019-1806 PE
Need to Better Assess Adversarial Decision Making 2 Geopolitical Gamesmanship, Social & State Stability, Extremist Movements … “The rules of war have cardinally changed… the effectiveness of non-military tools in achieving strategic or political goals in a conflict has exceeded that of weapons.” - General Gerasimov
How Assessments are Commonly Conducted 3 Common Practices ▪ At least one expert with a specific domain expertise ▪ Group discussions, role playing, brain storming techniques Current Limitations ▪ Not reproducible ▪ Typically focus on 1 st -ordered interaction effects ▪ Typical ability to understand dynamic structure and behavior is very limited ▪ Typically does not consider decision/social theories ▪ Typically incorporates limited range of information/data ▪ Often personality driven Yet… In this area human behavior is important to consider If we ignore human behavior, we are assuming it does not affect the system (setting it to zero)
Focus of DYMATICA 4 Dynamic Multi-Scale Assessment Tool for Integrated Cognitive-Behavioral Actions Informs High Consequence Decisions ▪ Minimize the likelihood of decisions that lead to undesirable consequences by providing a more systematic analysis of group and individual decisions within state and non-state entities. Impact ▪ Enable analysts to assess higher-order (cascading) influences and reactions to events, as well as determine the uncertainty that the event will produce the desired results over time
Scope of DYMATICA 5 Other EU Countries Societal (+) economic Systems relations Societies E. Europe (-) diplomatic Group State U.S . relations Dynamics (+) military/ diplomatic Adversary support for insurgents Psychological Influences Society Cognitive-System Dynamics Modeling Individuals Government Government Underlying Theories of Decision Making Leader Multi-INT GDP Military Sentiment Reports SME Data/Info CLASSIFICATION� BIA� Behavioral� Influence� Assessment � Home� Values� View� Data� Documenta on� Behavior� 1� � Military� � � Organiza on� Poli cal� Organiza on� Behavior� 2� � � � � � � Run� Behavior� 3� Behavior� 4� Scenario:� � � Current data to Behavior� 5� � � � � X� a acks� A,� etc … � � Behavior� 6� Behavior� 7� Military� Organiza on� Behavior� 8� update model Behavior� 9� 90� 80� Behavior� 10� Behavior� 11� 70� Behavior� 12� 60� outputs Behavior� 13� 50� Behavior� 14� 40� Behavior� 15� 30� Behavior� 16� 20� Behavior� 17� 10� Behavior� 18� 0� Behavior� 19� 1� 2� 3� 4� 5� 6� 7� 8� Behavior� 20� Descriptive & Hybrid Warfare Exercises Prescriptive Analytics and Future Operations
6 R&D Challenge: Modeling Sociocultural/Geopolitical Dynamics More rigorously assess sociocultural/ geopolitical responses to actions and events Develop and implement assessment capabilities that can effectively do this
Modeling Focus on Broad- & Decision-level Behavior 7 Behavioral Tendencies Humans unwittingly tend to fall prey to predictable forms of logic. ▪ Ex., People who fear loosing something valuable are ready to take greater risks than those who hope to make a gain (e.g., Vietcong versus U.S during the Vietnam War) Behavioral Tendencies 25% 75% Decision Making The cognitive mechanisms underlying the decision-making processes to enact intentional behaviors tend to be consistent across cultures. ▪ Ex., Meta-analysis demonstrate that a large variety of social Decision Making behaviors can be anticipated by sociocultural models (e.g., theory of planned behavior, etc.)
Assessing Behavioral Patterns 8 We assess the full range of behavioral patterns across time Given uncertainty, what interventions will most likely avoid unacceptable outcomes (including unintended consequences)? ▪ Example: Figures below shows likely behavioral paths across time. What is most important is to keep or move the range of behaviors to a level that is acceptable. > 2.5 is unacceptable > 2.5 is unacceptable 2.5 Assessing behaviors Assessing behaviors in without Intervention response to Intervention Time Time “River of Blood”: A now ‘formal’ term derived from the Bank of England Annual Report on economic forecasts and their uncertai nty. Because of temporal volatility, DYMATICA extends the logic beyond the simplistic use of “variance” confidence intervals
Based on Theories of Human Decision Making/Behaviors 9 Incorporates a Set of Theories Across Domains Theory Descriptions (Examples) Perceptual control theory ▪ Model of behavior based on the principles of negative feedback, but Psychology differing in important respects from engineering control theory Prospect theory • Recognition-Primed Decision Making ▪ People make decisions based on the potential value of losses and gains • Planned Behavior rather than the final outcome, and that • Model of Goal Directed Behavior the losses and gains are evaluated using certain heuristics • Cognitive Dissonance • Prospect Theory Recognition-primed decision making ▪ Model of how people make quick, effective decisions when faced with complex situations Behavioral Sociology Qualitative choice theory Economics ▪ Daniel McFadden: 2000 Nobel Prize • Social Learning • Bounded Rationality ▪ Social responses are dominated by uncertain decision logic, parameters, • Perceptual Control • Qualitative Choice and information processing Theory • Risk Asymmetry Social learning theory • Cointegration ▪ Individual’s behavior is influenced by the environment and characteristics of the person
Cognitive-System Dynamic Approach 10 Integration of Cognitive and System Models System Level Cognitive Level
Cognitive-System Dynamic Approach 11 Broad-Level Societal System (Example) System� Level Cognitive� Level Affect! (posi' ve)! Cues ! Poten' al!! Cogni' ve! Behaviors! Percep' ons! Mo' va' ons! Inten' ons! ! Exogenous! S+muli ! Object A5 tude! Perceived! Social! Norms! Perceived! Behavioral! Control! Recency! Frequency! Output!!Behaviors!!as!!S+muli !
Core Psychosocial Architecture 12 System� Level Entity 1 Cognitive� Level Affect! (posi' ve)! Cues ! Poten' al!! Cogni' ve! Behaviors! Percep' ons! Mo' va' ons! Inten' ons! ! Exogenous! S+muli ! Object A5 tude! Perceived! Social! Norms! Perceived! Behavioral! Control! Recency! Frequency! Output!!Behaviors!!as!!S+muli ! Entity 2 Entity 3
Information Underlying Cognitive Models 13 System� Level Cognitive� Level Affect! (posi' ve)! Cues ! Poten' al!! Cogni' ve! Behaviors! Percep' ons! Mo' va' ons! Inten' ons! ! Exogenous! S+muli ! A5 tude! Object Perceived! Social! Norms! Perceived! Behavioral! Control! Recency! Frequency! Output!!Behaviors!!as!!S+muli !
Conceptual Model to Math Implementation 14 One-to-one Mapping of Conceptual Model to Mathematical Implementation Translating and incorporating SME opinion into computational, decision models of specific groups/individuals
Mathematical Implementation 15
Mathematical Implementation 16 Example World model and previous Elicited lag behaviors times
Information Underlying Cognitive Models 17 Example System� Level Cognitive� Level Affect! (posi' ve)! Cues ! Poten' al!! Cogni' ve! Behaviors! Percep' ons! Mo' va' ons! Inten' ons! ! Exogenous! S+muli ! A5 tude! Object Perceived! Social! Norms! Perceived! Behavioral! Control! Recency! Frequency! Output!!Behaviors!!as!!S+muli !
Recommend
More recommend
