fgan
play

FGAN FGAN FGAN FGAN Content 2 1. An overview of BML-related - PDF document

Mar 18, 2024 •230 likes •387 views

2/4/09 1 BML-Related Research in Germany presented at the GMU Battle Management Language Symposium 2009 George Mason University Dr. Ulrich Schade Dr. Eckehard Neugebauer FGAN-FKIE IABG GERMANY GERMANY schade@fgan.de

  1. • 2/4/09 1 BML-Related Research in Germany presented at the GMU Battle Management Language Symposium 2009 George Mason University Dr. Ulrich Schade Dr. Eckehard Neugebauer FGAN-FKIE IABG GERMANY GERMANY schade@fgan.de neugebauer@iabg.de FGAN FGAN FGAN FGAN Content 2 1. An overview of BML-related research in Germany 2. Grammar extensions for communication in Complex Endeavors 3. Grammar extensions for communicating Geo-Information 4. Conclusions FGAN FGAN FGAN FGAN • 1

  2. • 2/4/09 BML-related research in Germany 3 coordinated by the Federal Office of the Bundeswehr for Information Management and Information Technology Modeling and Simulation Branch POC: Major Thomas Orichel FGAN FGAN BML-related research in Germany 4 Contributions to NATO RTO MSG 048 “Coalition BML” Command and Control Lexical Grammar (C2LG) developed in cooperation with especially with Dr. Michael R. Hieb The C2LG defines a BML that allows expressing orders (assignment of tasks to units + command intent), requests and reports. FGAN FGAN • 2

  3. • 2/4/09 BML-related research in Germany 5 Command and Control Lexical Grammar (C2LG) The BML defined by the C2LG allows users to formulate orders, requests and reports taking advantage of their military knowledge. Example: A orders B to occupy a specific building: occupy A B Building2109 at Melkar Square start at now label-r-4828; FGAN FGAN BML-related research in Germany 6 Contributions to NATO RTO MSG 048 “Coalition BML” • Schade, U. & Hieb, M.R. (2008). A linguistic basis for multi-agency coordination. 13th ICCRTS , June 2008, Bellevue, WA. • Hieb, M.R. & Schade, U. (2008). Applying a Formal Language of Command and Control for Inter-operability between Systems. AFCEA-GMU C4I Center Symposium „Critical Issues in C4I“. Fairfax, VA. • Schade, U. & Hieb, M.R. (2007). Improving Planning and Replanning: Using a Formal Grammar to Automate Processing of Command and Control Information for Decision Support. The International C2 Journal, 1 (2), 69-90. • Hieb, M.R. & Schade, U. (2007). Formalizing Command Intent Through Development of a Command and Control Grammar. 12th ICCRTS . Newport, RI. • Schade, U. & Hieb, M.R. (2007). Battle Management Language: A Grammar for Specifying Reports. 2007 Spring SIW (= Paper 07S-SIW-036). Norfolk, VA. • Schade, U. & Hieb, M.R. (2006). Development of Formal Grammars to Support Coalition Command and Control: A Battle Management Language for Orders, Requests, and Reports. 11th ICCRTS . Cambridge, UK. • Schade, U. & Hieb, M.R. (2006). Formalizing Battle Management Language: A Grammar for Specifying Orders. 2006 Spring SIW (= Paper 06S-SIW-068). Huntsville, AL. some papers about C2LG FGAN FGAN • 3

  4. • 2/4/09 BML-related research in Germany 7 Contributions to NATO RTO MSG 048 “Coalition BML” Orders, requests, and reports that follow the C2LG can be formulated with the help of the C2LG-GUI. This GUI has been connected to the Dutch C2 system ISIS and the Norwegian C2 system NORTaC for the MSG 048 demonstrations presented at I/ITSEC 07 and I/ITSEC 08 in Orlando, Florida. FGAN FGAN 8 BML-related research in Germany C2LG-GUI – snapshot FGAN FGAN • 4

  5. • 2/4/09 BML-related research in Germany 9 Contributions to NATO RTO MSG 048 “Coalition BML” C2LG-GUI FGAN FGAN BML-related research in Germany 10 Contributions to NATO RTO MSG 048 “Coalition BML” Papers about the I/ITSEC presentations: • De Reus, N., de Krom, P., Pullen, M. & Schade, U. (2008). BML – Proof of Principle and Future Development. I/ITSEC , December 2008, Orlando, FL. • Pullen, M., Hieb, M.R., Schade, U., Rein, K., Frey, M. & Orichel, T. (2008). Enabling the MSG-048 Multinational Demonstration 2007 with the Command and Control Lexical Grammar and JBML Web Services. NATO MSG Conference , October 2008, Vancouver, Canada. • De Reus, N., De Krom, P., Mevassvik, O.M., Alstad, A., Sletten, G., Schade, U. & Frey, M. (2008). BML-enabling of national C2 systems for coupling to Simulation. Spring SIW (= Paper 08S-SIW-095), April 2008, Providence, RI. • Pullen, M., Carey, S., Cordonnier, N., Khimeche, L., Schade, U., de Reus, N., LeGrand, G., Mevassvik, O.M., Cubero, S.G., Gonzales Godoy, S., Powers, M. & Galvin, K. (2008). NATO MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Initial Demonstration. Spring SIW (= Paper 08S-SIW-082) , April 2008, Providence, RI. FGAN FGAN • 5

  6. • 2/4/09 BML-related research in Germany 11 The Fraunhofer institute IAIS developed a multi-agent simulation system (ITSimBw). A version of BML based on the C2LG was used in this system for inter-agent communication . Advantage: Simulated units (agents) can easily be substituted by real units (and vice versa) without changing their communication behavior. Hügelmeyer, P., Schade, U. & Zöller, T. (2007). Application of BML to inter-agent communication in the ITSimBw simulation environment. In: Henderson, S.G., Biller, B., Hsieh, M.-H., Shortle, J., Tew, J.D. & Barton, R.R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2007 Winter Simulation Conference , December 2007, Washington, DC . FGAN FGAN BML Projects in Germany 12 There are three more projects in progress that include BML aspects: • in National Project VSimFü C2LG is used to task Simulated Units for Future Concept Development • in Coalition Project COMELEC C2LG is used to task French and German Simulated Units • in National Project AUGE C2LG is used as a representation language for the analysis of HUMINT Reports FGAN FGAN • 6

  7. • 2/4/09 BML Projects in Germany 13 Project VSimFü C2LG-GUI POC: Dr. Probst Bodo.Probst@esg.de FGAN FGAN BML Projects in Germany 14 German Contributions to Project COMELEC (2009) FGAN FGAN • 7

  8. • 2/4/09 BML Projects in Germany 15 Project Report Header Analyst’s Topic Interface Content Threat Threat Content in BML Recognizer Model Indicators POC: Mr. Ziegler FGAN e.V. ZieglerJ@iabg.de FGAN FGAN Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 16 Purely Military Communications do not work in a Complex Endeavor. In a military operation, orders are used to assign tasks to subordinate units. “Order” incorporates the meaning that the one who gives the order can expect the one who receives it will execute it without question. In the context of a Complex Endeavor, orders cannot be used to assign tasks to other organizations. FGAN FGAN • 8

  9. • 2/4/09 Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 17 A Directive is a speech act that has the purpose of having the receiver perform a task. Directives Orders typical for military operations Taskings typical for complex endeavors Requests typical for complex endeavors also Pleas Challenges FGAN FGAN Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 18 Orders : The right to direct the receiver results from military organizational hierarchy. (The receiver is subordinate to the sender.) Tasking: The right to direct the receiver results from some organizational hierarchy. (The sender coordinates the endeavor.) Requests: The right to direct the receiver does not result from a organizational hierarchy, but derives from the common intent. The requested action would help to achieve a common goal (as agreed upon in the common intent). FGAN FGAN • 9

  10. • 2/4/09 Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 19 Orders The recipient of an order executes the ordered task without question. Taskings / Requests The recipient of a request may not execute the requested task. However, the requester needs to know whether the requested task will be executed. Thus, the receiver of a request must confirm that the request was received and – if the receiver will execute the requested task – he has to commit himself to do so. FGAN FGAN Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 20 To handle the communication between Military Organizations, Civil Organizations and NGOs, the language (BML) must include Confirmations and Commissives / Declinations . These types of expressions serve as coordination tools in the multi-agent context of Complex Endeavors. FGAN FGAN • 10

  11. • 2/4/09 Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 21 Example: A → B tasking: evacuate A B Building2109 at Melkar Square start at now […] label-r-4828; B → A tasking-confirmation: label-r-4828; commission: evacuate B Building2109 at Melkar Square start at now […] regarding label-r-4828 label-com-4835; [declination: label-r-4828;] FGAN FGAN Grammar Extensions for Complex Endeavors 22 Papers about the C2LG adaptation for Complex Endeavors: • Schade, U. & Hieb, M.R. (2008). A Linguistic Basis for Multi-Agency Coordination. 13th ICCRTS , June 2008. Bellevue, WA. • Hieb, M.R., Kleiner, M., Carey, S. & Schade, U. (2009). Characterizing Doctrine through a Formalization of C2 Processes. Paper submitted to the 14th ICCRTS , June 2009. Washington, DC. FGAN FGAN • 11

  12. • 2/4/09 Developing Grammar Extensions 23 for Communicating GEO-Information The GeoBML process determines Tactical Spatial Objects (TSO). There are several situations in which these TSO have to be communicated. For example: 1. Information Sharing Informs about the existence of the TSO. 2. Reference: Designating the TSO in a Directive. FGAN FGAN Developing Grammar Extensions 24 for Communicating GEO-Information Tactical Spatial Objects (TSO) Information Sharing Suggested Format: doctrinal statement: Sender TSO TSO-type TSO-ID Label Example: doctrinal statement : PzGrenBde37 TSO CheckPoint Pi label-ds-17; More information about Pi will be in the database. The ID Pi can be hyperlinked to that information. FGAN FGAN • 12

More recommend