International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DoD Architecture Framework Overview
Advertisements

GOES Users’ Conference III May 10-13, 2004 Broomfield, CO Prepared by Integrated Work Strategies, LLC GOES USERS’ CONFERENCE III: Discussion Highlights.
P1516.4: VV&A Overlay to the FEDEP 20 September 2007 Briefing for the VV&A Summit Simone Youngblood Simone Youngblood M&S CO VV&A Proponency Leader
Chapter 10 Analysis and Design Discipline. 2 Purpose The purpose is to translate the requirements into a specification that describes how to implement.
1 The XMSF Profile Overlay to the FEDEP Dr. Katherine L. Morse, SAIC Mr. Robert Lutz, JHU APL
Process 4 Hours.
Discussion Topics for Exploring OMG UPDM Way-ahead
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
IDEAS Model for Coalition Architecture Interoperability
Enterprise Architecture
Software Project Configuration Management
“New” things Discussed in London
Agenda Federated Enterprise Architecture Vision
International Defense Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Briefing to DoDAF 2.0 Development Team TBD 2007
Unified Architecture Framework NATO Architecture CaT Introduction
Project life span.
Chapter 6: Database Project Management
IDEAS Data Exchange Format (RDFS)
Software Configuration Management
Introduction to MODEM Building a Semantic Foundation for EA: Reengineering the MODAF™ Meta-Model Based on the IDEAS Foundation Model Lt Col Mikael Hagenbo,
MODAF Ontological Data Exchange Model (MODEM)
Chapter 9: Project Communications Management
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Component 11 Configuring EHRs
US Kickoff brief to Frameworks Convergence Meeting
Stakeholders’ Analysis
Workshop for ACT – IAC, EA-SIG Mr. David McDaniel (ctr) 20 July 2012
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Agenda All-Monday 15 Sep 0800 Welcome - Opening remarks
ServiceNow Implementation Knowledge Management
Introduction DoDAF 2.0 Meta Model (DM2) TBS dd mon 2009 VERSION 15
Fundamentals of Information Systems
SIP Report – Nov 2017 Overview Headlines Workstream report
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
CMS HIPAA Transaction Implementation Status Checklist
Unified Architecture Framework
Briefing to DoDAF 2.0 Development Team TBD 2007
Project Roles and Responsibilities
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Project Plan Template (Help text appears in cursive on slides and in the notes field)
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Review June 2012 London Unified Architecture Framework Meeting
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
International Defense Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Architecture Data Exchange Experiments Military Utility Demonstration
Technical Update MultiSpeak Users’ Group Meeting
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Architecture Data Exchange Experiments Military Utility Demonstration
Connected Vehicle Reference Implementation Architecture (CVRIA)
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Vanilson Burégio The Battlefield Control System – The First Case Study in Applying the ATAM Chapter 4 of: Clements, Paul et al., Evaluating.
IDEAS Core Model Concept
DoD Architecture Framework Overview
X-DIS/XBRL Phase 2 Kick-Off
International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
Manager’s Overview DoDAF 2.0 Meta Model (DM2) TBS dd mon 2009
“New” things Discussed in London
“New” things Discussed in London
Roles and Responsibilities of a Project Manager
Risk Mitigation & Incident Response Week 12
CORE Name: CORE® Description:
Chapter 9: Project Communications Management
Establishing a Strategic Process Roadmap
US Kickoff brief to Frameworks Convergence Meeting
Chapter 12 Project Communication and Documentation
International Defense Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS)
“New” things Discussed in London
Presentation transcript:

International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS) Status and Ways Ahead 14 April 2008

Briefing Outline Original Objectives Accomplishments Possible Ways Ahead Update Objectives Some Possible Courses of Action Mission Complete – Dis-establish Group Energize Model Development Prepare for Handoff to ???

Original Objectives as per TOR To deliver a specification for the exchange of architectural documentation and artifacts between coalition partners for the purpose of Coalition Military Operations: Establish an oversight mechanism to perform configuration control activities. Identify and approve all key activities and milestones required for the accomplishment of the Working Group’s goals. Define, agree, and implement a technical approach for IDEAS testing. Evolve the high level classes with all attributes and relationships that ensure a cohesive exchange infrastructure to meet the major goals and objectives. Often in international missions it is valuable to be aware of any process dis-interoperabilities prior to mission commencement. For example, for Coalition Operations, it is important to know how battlefield casualties will be handled by the participants, in the event one’s own casualty soldier is being taken care of by another nation’s medical corps, or vice-versa, where one is caring for another nation’s casualty. There may be legal and cultural requirements, notification, reporting, timeline, or event response expectations, and so forth that we would not want to discover during the mission, but, rather, be aware of ahead of time so the processes can be adjusted or so that commanders are aware of how their casualties will be taken careof and can adjust their expectations. The United Kingdom, United States, Canada, and Australia are working on just such an experiment as part of the International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS) project. While the focus of the project has been on the architecture data ontology, there is also recognition that the process mismatches need to analyzed and displayed to commanders in a way that alerts them to significant issues and that makes their jobs of planning for the Coalition mission easier and more thoroughly thought through. This presentation reports on IDEAS experimentation progress to date, describes analysis algorithms being worked on, and shows various notional and real presentation options that would be meaningful and useful to commanders. It describes issues in multi-source EA data analysis and possible remedies. Issues with end-user display of multi-source EA data analysis results are also discussed along with various alternatives being experimented with by the IDEAS project.

Accomplishments

TABs in TOR Name Tab A - Joint Management Committee TOR Tab B - Agreed taxonomy Tab C - C2 structures to support exchange requirements Status Done including AV-2 Started, ~ 5% done Not started

Overall GANNT

Experiment ’08 GANNT

IDEAS Data Exchange Format (RDFS) Visualization Environment Decision Environment Experiment Design Relational DB Query Environment SQL Query OWL/RDFS DB Data Mining Environment RDFS Database IDEAS Data Exchange Format (RDFS)

Use Case Design: Initial Idea – Compare Doctrines Went down this path for a while but then,… Looking at recent CM “lessons learned” led us a different way, e.g., Scud missile attack on US barracks near end of Desert Storm

Better Use Case Design EA Datasets Lessons Learned

Benefit Analysis Automated Compare CA EA UK EA AU EA 1 data parse IDEAS US EA • 4 mental data parses of our native doctrine (instead of 12)! • 0 mental comparisons (instead of 12) against an consistent ontology vice a national background!

Military Utility Analysis Exchanging architecture data during coalition operations planning process: Can automate interoperability comparisons to: Reduce resource requirements Speed the process Potentially detect issues that may have been missed De-bias national interpretations of other doctrines Identify critical interoperability or capability “failure” points Depends on a precise data exchange standard IDEAS grounding in a formal ontology provides such precision

Model Inventory: By SME maturity rating By xxxAF product dataset support

Other Utilization Foundation for US DoDAF 2.0 Meta Model (DMM) UK MODEM UPDM Participation

DoDAF 2.0 Meta Model (Version 0.1) Overview

Uses IDEAS Foundation and Common Patterns

Revisit Objectives Existing: New: To deliver a specification for the exchange of architectural documentation and artifacts between coalition partners for the purpose of Coalition Military Operations: Establish an oversight mechanism to perform configuration control activities. Identify and approve all key activities and milestones required for the accomplishment of the Working Group’s goals. Define, agree, and implement a technical approach for IDEAS testing. Evolve the high level classes with all attributes and relationships that ensure a cohesive exchange infrastructure to meet the major goals and objectives. New: xxxAF support UPDM NAF National ontology initiatives, e.g., US UCORE

Some Possible Courses of Action Mission Complete – Dis-establish Group Energize Model Development How? Prepare for Handoff to ???