Coalition Agents eXperiment (CoAX) The Coalition TIE AFRL Rome, AIAI, Boeing, Dartmouth, DERA Malvern, Lockheed Martin ATL, Michigan, MIT Sloan, Stanford, USC/ISI Support from GITI, ISX, Mitre Supported by DARPA CoABS Program

DARPA

CoAX/Briefing/3 Scope u Coalition TIE u Coalition Scenario - Binni u Technical Approach u Initial Demonstration u Plans and Timescales u Management Plan u Summary

CoAX/Briefing/4 Coalition TIE Overview u Aim of demonstrations is to show: u interoperability between Coalition applications and information services (via the DARPA CoABS Grid) by using a heterogeneous agent community in multiple distinct “domains”. u Aim will be met through a number of phased technical demonstrations of increasing complexity.

CoAX/Briefing/5 Coalition Scenario Features u Different doctrine, decision making, rules of engagement and, in general, mission “agendas”. u Different technology skill and equipment levels. u Different cultures and languages. u Questionable compatibility of respective national information systems. u Limited models for coalition force operations. u Command authorities - agreement and transfers. u Variable reliability of components and infrastructures. u Information systems resource sharing agreements and capacity. u Different interpretation of situational information. u Lack of compatible security architectures. From LeRoy Pearce (Canadian MOD), 1999

CoAX/Briefing/6 Binni - Gateway to the Golden Bowl of Africa Rathmell, R.A. (1999) A Coalition Force Scenario 'Binni - Gateway to the Golden Bowl of Africa', in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Knowledge-Based Planning for Coalition Forces, (ed. Tate, A.) pp , Edinburgh, Scotland, 10th-11th May 1999.

CoAX/Briefing/7 Key Technical Drivers u Working with agents in multiple dynamic domains. u Need for partial sharing of data and facilities. u Cannot assume compatibility or complete reliability of functional capabilities, communications, security arrangements or information resources. u Need to integrate and use legacy systems. u Need for rapid formation and management of agent relationships. u Need to respect national concerns, limitations, cultural and political differences, etc. u Unclear and/or emerging objectives and tasking.

CoAX/Briefing/8 Research Issues u Agent Domain Management. u Dynamic agent organization formation and management. u Inter-agent Task and Process Management. u “Come as you are” capabilities and data sources. u Detection and diagnosis of agent compatibility problems, protocol violations and other exceptions. u Partial (secure) sharing of capabilities and information. u Shared and local visualizations for processes and information.

CoAX/Briefing/9 Technical Approach CoABS Grid (DARPA) Grid-Aware Agent Frameworks EMAA/CAST Agents (LM ATL) KAoS Agents (Boeing) CoABS Grid Services Domain Management Services (Boeing) Task and Process Management (AIAI) Incentive Management (Stanford) Robustness Services (MIT) Agent-Wrapped Capabilities MBP (DERA) CAMPS (AFRL) Multi-level Coordination (Michigan) Intelligence Agent (Dartmouth) Legacy Applications (LM ATL, others) Agent-Wrapped Data Sources AODB and other DBs (LM ATL) Ariadne (USC/ISI) Other DBs...

CoAX/Briefing/10 Multiple Areas of Concerns Coalition UK X-Country Function (e.g. intelligence) US Sub-US

CoAX/Briefing/11 Dynamic Domain Management Country X Domain Country Y Domain Coalition Domain Subdomain ASubdomain B 1. Islands of Common Policy 2. Points of Common Administration

CoAX/Briefing/12 Demo Arrangements Narrator New Domain Representative MBP Copy? Ariadne Info 4 Coalition Commander Ariadne Info 3 MCA US Representative CAMPS Intell. Agent CAST/EMAA Ariadne Info 2 UK Representative MBP Ariadne Info 1 Domain Management Task & Process Management Incentives Management Robustness Services

CoAX/Briefing/13 Month 1 - Initial Demo u Demonstration involves AFRL Rome, DERA Malvern and LM ATL and is a first (risk reduction) step toward CoAX. u Demo shows legacy applications can be usefully integrated into an agent framework. CoABS Grid EMAA / CAST Agents (LM ATL, US) AODB Master Battle Planner v2.1 (DERA, UK)

MBP Situation Map (Blue View)

CoAX/Briefing/15 CoAX Management Plan u 4 phased demos – 1, 9, 18 and 30 months. u 4 grid management services being explored: u Domain Management; u Task and Process Management; u Robustness and Exception Management; u Incentives Management. u 3 types of involvement in TIE: u Coalition-driven Management Services – AIAI, Boeing, DERA, MIT, Stanford; u Coalition-driven Capabilities – AFRL, Dartmouth, DERA, LM ATL, Michigan, USC/ISI; u Coalition Scenario Usage – others. u Buddy System. u 18 month demo is a focal point to engage other nations and research teams.

CoAX/Briefing/16 Plans and Timescales u February 2000 (Month 1) - Initial AFRL/DERA/LM ATL demo. u July 2000 (Month 6) - AFRL, AIAI, Boeing, DERA and LM ATL agents working together on the CoABS grid via KAoS on a simple agent task. Multiple domain design document. Scenario description. u October 2000 (Month 9) - Demo incorporating MBP, EMAA/CAST, CAMPS and Ariadne. u July 2001 (Month 18) - Coalition scenario demo with fixed domains to CoABS and TTCP Representatives. u July 2002 (Month 30) - Larger scale demo with more domains and agents including dynamic domain management and dynamic tasking.

CoAX/Briefing/17 Planned Inputs u February 2000 (Month 1) - AFRL, DERA, LM ATL responsible for demo. u July 2000 (Month 6) – All participants have provided input to scenario, all participants in month 9 demo are “on-the-grid”. u October 2000 (Month 9) – AFRL, AIAI, Boeing, DERA, LM ATL, USC/ISI responsible for core demo. Michigan, MIT and Stanford provide “on-the-grid” add-on demos and storyboards in agreed coalition scenario. u July 2001 (Month 18) – All current participants in joint demo. u July 2002 (Month 30) – Possible participation of other nations (especially TTCP) and CoABS participants.

CoAX/Briefing/18 Further Information u See u u Outstanding Issues follow. u Spare slides.

CoAX/Briefing/19 CoAX Outstanding Issues u Mike Kirton suggests that we seek to relate the list of coalition and technical objectives to the specific demonstrations we plan. u Mike Kirton notes that discussion in the TIE is needed to establish how the scenario maps to I-X and that maps to KAoS Domain Management.

CoAX/Briefing/20 Types of Involvement in TIE u Task management services u Task and process management (AIAI) u Incentive management (Stanford) u Agent management services u Domain management (Boeing) u Robustness (MIT) u Agent-management-aware capabilities u MBP (DERA) u CAMPS (AFRL) u Ariadne (USC/ISI) u Other Capabilities u Ariadne (USC/ISI) – unmodified u EMAA/CAST (LM-ATL) u O-Plan (AIAI) u Multi-level Coordination Agent (Michigan) u Intelligence Agent (Dartmouth)

CoAX/Briefing/21 Agent-Management-Aware Services Structure Agent Management Helper Agent Agent Capability Agent Management Services provider Service requester “Come-as- you-are” Agent

CoAX/Briefing/22 Jeff’s Slide for Conceptual Architecture Agent Management Helper Agent Task- and Agent- Management-Aware Agent Capabilities Combined with Human Capabilities Agent Management Services functionality Service provider Service requester Agent Task Management Services functionality Service provider Service requester

CoAX/Briefing/23 Austin’s Slide for Conceptual Architecture Coalition Scenario KAoS I-X Grid Infrastructure Grid Management Services Task and Process Management Domain Management Control and Incentives Robustness and Exceptions Ariadne CAST CAMPS MBP O-Plan Grid-Aware Capabilities Intell. MCA AIAI Boeing Stanford MIT USC/ISI AIAI DERA AFRL/BBN LM ATL Michigan Dartmouth

CoAX/Briefing/24 Agent Activity Triggers u Examples of situations which will trigger the need for information exchange by the agents include: u User checks to see if air units are over tasked, u Arrival of new information on the location / status of a SAM site, u User creates a new package / mission and needs to know whether Coalition assets are available, u Changes to plan details have to be disseminated to Coalition National HQs, wings, units etc, u User checks to see if missions have completed their tasks.

CoAX/Briefing/25 Agent Activity - Information u Examples of information to be collected, transformed and exchanged by the agents includes: u Entity attributes: u Location, status. u Co-ordination information: u Timing - e.g. mission critical points (waypoints), u Membership of missions / packages, u Current 'parent' unit, etc u 'Bean counting': u Numbers over tasked, currently airborne etc,

CoAX/Briefing/26 AFRL/DERA/LM ATL Demo (2) Scenario data – for target and asset data Tanker Planning Agent The GRID EMAA / CAST Agent AODB MBP Proxy Agent DERA Target Agent DERA Asset Agent Intelligence Update Agent MBP Wrapper MBP JavaSpace

CoAX/Briefing/27 AFRL/DERA/LM ATL Demo Situation at Day 3 u TFM 95 u Based at RAF Leuchars u Day th September u Overland offensive, Iona u Mythical opponent u UNCLASSIFIED data... RAF Prestwick Opponent's Airspace RAF Leuchars Friendly Airspace FLOT * This is an entirely mythical site / scenario TFM is the Tactical Fighter Meet T Iona Chemical Storage Area *