Agenda 12:00 – 1:00 PM Registration, Poster Setup, and Networking   Welcome, Admin Announcements and Agenda Overview   John Paschkewitz, DSO Program Manager  1:05 – 1:10 PM   Contract Management Office (CMO) Overview   Michael Mutty, Contracting Officer 1:10 – 1:25 PM   Defense Sciences Office (DSO) Overview   Bill Regli, DSO Deputy Director 1:25 – 2:25 PM   CASCADE Overview 2:25 – 2:45 PM    Government-Only Meeting   (Review and answer question cards) 2:45 – 3:00 PM   Question and Answer Session (Live and Webcasted) 3:00 – 5:00 PM   Poster Session, Networking, and Sidebars Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

Michael Mutty DARPA Contract Management Office DARPA BAA PROCESS Michael Mutty DARPA Contract Management Office December 9, 2015 Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

READ THE BAA BAA PROCESS DRAFTING THE BAA Technical vs Administrative Words are Meaningful Must and Shall May Technical vs Administrative Technical Leads to “Selectable” Administrative Leads to Contract Award Cost Proposal IP Assertions Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

BAA PROCESS PROPOSAL PREPARATION/SUBMISSION Instructions are detailed in the BAA (Follow closely) ALL questions to program mailbox: CASCADE@darpa.mil FAQ (including today’s) will be available on the program website on the DSO Homepage (Read Regularly) Funding instrument types may vary from program to program but may include procurement contract(s), other transactions, assistance instruments (cooperative agreements) Assert rights to all technical data & computer software generated, developed, and/or delivered to which the Government will receive less than Unlimited Rights If you don’t justify your proposed costs, we can’t justify awarding you a contract. Pay close attention to cost proposal instructions Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

BAA PROCESS EVALUATION/AWARD Read Evaluation Criteria Carefully Government reserves the right to select for award all, some (partial selection), or none of the proposals received. Government anticipates making multiple awards No common Statement of Work - Proposals evaluated on individual merit and relevance as it relates to the stated research goals/objectives rather than against each other Overview of the Process 3 Government Reviewers PM Recommendation to the SRO Notification Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

Defense Sciences Office Dr. Bill Regli December 9, 2015 Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

DARPA’s Mission: Breakthrough Technologies For National Security Precision Guidance & Navigation Communications/Networking IR Night Vision Stealth UAVs Investing today for the next generation 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 2030s Microelectronics: VLSI, CAD, manufacturing, IR, RF, MEMS ARPAnet/Internet Information Technology: timesharing, client/server, graphics, GUI, RISC, parallel computing, speech recognition Materials Science: semiconductors, superalloys, carbon fibers, composites, thermoelectrics, ceramics These new capabilities require a healthy ecosystem across Service S&T, universities, and industry DARPA’s role: pivotal early investments that change what’s possible Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

DARPA Technical Offices BIOLOGICAL TECHNOLOGY OFFICE DEFENSE SCIENCE OFFICE INFORMATION INNOVATION OFFICE MICROSYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY OFFICE STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY OFFICE TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY OFFICE Biological Complexity at Scale Neurotechnologies Engineering Biology Restore, Maintain and Improve Warfighter Abilities Math, Modeling & Design Physical Systems Human-Machine Systems Empower the Human within the Information Ecosystem Guarantee Trustworthy Computing and Information Electromagnetic Spectrum Tactical Information Extraction Globalization System of Systems (SoS) Battle Management/Command and Control (BMC2) Communications and Networks (C&N) Electronic Warfare (EW) Intelligence Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) System Focus Areas: Ground Maritime Air Space Crosscutting Themes: Agile development Cooperative Autonomy Unmanned Systems Power and Propulsion Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

DSO is “DARPA’s DARPA” Accelerating breakthrough discoveries to create new enabling technologies for national security Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

Human-Machine Systems Focus Areas Math, Modeling& Design Physical Systems © 2007 Ned Batchelder Human-Machine Systems Credit: Detroit Institute of Arts Social Systems The Economist, April 2012 Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

We look forward to your ideas Distribution Statement “A” (Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited)

Complex Adaptive System Composition And Design Environment (CASCADE) Dr. John Paschkewitz DSO December 9, 2015 Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

How can we design complex systems to meet unanticipated needs How can we design complex systems to meet unanticipated needs? Using arbitrary components? Structure: buildings, HVAC, power grid, water network, roads, vehicles, ... Behaviors: electrical transmission, working sanitation, transportation… Function Constraints: road capacity, power grid capacity and storage, … Events: blizzard, earthquake, tsunami with nuclear event… Resilient urban infrastructure healthcare, housing, public safety, sustenance, … Christchurch, New Zealand, 2011 (Commons.Wikimedia.org) Define a framework for thinking about systems Resilient and adaptive means that we need to think about *dynamics* of composition, with changing pieces and BC’s. Need: Fundamentally change how we design systems for real-time resilient response to dynamic, unexpected environments Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

Complex military systems can be similarly composed – and have similar challenges Air Dominance SoS Functions: strike, ISR, EW, … Structures: manned and unmanned assets, communication networks, subsystems, materials, …. Behaviors: communications, PNT, jamming, transportation, … Constraints: power, logistics tail, … Events: environmental challenges, attrition, surprise red team capability, … Forward surgical capability Functions: resuscitative surgery, medevac Structures: surgeons, helicopters, communication networks,… Behaviors: medical skills, transportation Constraints: time, blood supply, mobility, surgeon risk, patient state… Events: environmental challenges, communications jamming, … https://commons.wikimedia.org/ The same framework can be used to think about military SoS. The system is complex because of the many scales of interaction and dynamics. An example that has characteristics of both military and urban systems is a forward surgical team for battlefield medicine. To help explain the program ideas, I’ll use this example because it highlights some aspects of complex systems design that are extremely challenging with today’s tools An FST is 2 medics, 2 nurses and 2 surgeons with enough supplies to do 8 surgeries. The goal is to reduce KIA/DOW’s by getting to surgery faster – time is critical! Unfortunately, they don’t work – there was no statistical evidence of reduction of DOW’s in Iraq/Afgh. What if we wanted to design a autonomous telesurgery option? Or a fast, unmanned medevac system? How would we do the tradeoff analysis of the 2, which involves everything from surgical skills to logistics to engineering? Complexity results from interactions between structures and behaviors across multiple time and spatial scales Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

Why can’t we design resource-efficient resilient and adaptive complex systems today? Design cycle Engineering models compose system structures and behavior Logistics and time provide constraints Empirical assessment of function Mission models define events https://transition.fcc.gov/pshs/techtopics/techtopics19.html Limitations & Challenges: Composition of structures, behaviors and constraints across scales and time Adaptation to dynamic environments with evolving threats in real time The problem is hard because today’s tools can’t compose disparate structures and behaviors in a unified way. Adaptation amplifies these problems because we have a design cycle that is decoupled, slow and is built to anticipate a small number of events. We can make a system resilient by giving it lots of redundancy in anticipation of known contingencies. We can make it adaptive by training it for known threats. What if we had a way to understand design interactions across all dimensions of structure and behavior at the same time? To anticipate or even exploit interaction cascades? To enable a system to understand a full set of creative options to adapt? Goal: Demonstrate a validated capability to model and design complex adaptive systems starting from new mathematical foundations for composition and adaptation Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

Program elements Metrics Computational complexity Formal verifiability Approximation methods Compositional generality Resilience and Adaptiveness limits Challenge Integrate formal mathematics for unified design TA1: Foundations Integrated teams address abstraction, composition and adaptation Challenge Build new design framework from mathematics up TA2: Applications Develop a new design capability for military SoS or urban resilience with TA1 teams Metric Prediction and design against real-world problems Government Challenge Partner Surprise problems and metrics T&E partner Single, collaborative test environment End product: Complex adaptive system design tools with a library of resilient and adaptive designs Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

Program Schedule FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 Phase 1 Phase 2 12 mos. Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Establish design foundations Baseline Model (14 months) Design Challenge 1: Basic Resilience (22 months) Design Challenge 2: Adaptation (34 months) Design Challenge 3: Living Systems (46 months) TA1: Foundations New complex adaptive system design tools Library of adaptive system architectures Unified abstraction, composition and adaptation framework “Pseudo-API” for TA2 Develop basic M&S infrastructure using TA1 foundations Time-dependent Adaptive Composition (e.g. for pervasive sensing) Dynamic and Resilient Functional composition TA2: Applications Define problems, demonstrate test “harness” and SOA performance T&E environment partner Unified development and testbed environment Split to ITAR (SoS) and non-ITAR (urban) environments Government Challenge & IV&V partner Establish appropriate level of detail, metrics for baseline with TA2’s Define detailed surprise challenge 1 parameters and metrics Define detailed surprise challenge 2 parameters and metrics Define detailed surprise challenge 3 parameters and metrics Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

TA1: Mathematical Foundations GOAL: provide a unified formal mathematical foundation for complex adaptive system design incorporating abstraction, composition and adaptation Abstraction Describe system structures, behaviors, constraints and events in a way that exposes only the information required to define the resulting function Address the complexity of interfaces, multiscale interactions, and dynamics in a computable and computationally tractable manner Want a uniform, formal approach across all scales and domains Possible approaches: Category theory, Model theory Composition Enable general synthesis of functions from structures and behaviors, subject to constraints, in response to events – must include dynamics Demonstrate both compositionality and composability Possible approaches: algebraic geometry and topology, sheaf theory, cochain and process algebra Adaptation Enabled by a unified view (abstraction) and a formal language for composition of functions from arbitrary structures and behaviors Requires assessment of environment and system state under uncertainty Reason over system state to achieve functional “equivalence” using real-time composition Must address stochasticity and reasoning over uncertainty in a principled manner Images: top: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:MorphismComposition-01.png, middle: c/o Rob Ghrist, UPenn, bottom:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chameleon Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

TA2: Applications GOAL: Integrate deep knowledge of application area challenges and the new mathematical foundations of TA1 in powerful domain-specific modeling and design frameworks Choose 1 of 2 application areas (see the BAA for more details): Military systems of systems (SoS) at the unclassified level – e.g., adaptive battlefield medicine, logistics, maintenance Resilient urban infrastructure – e.g., Dynamic community function (e.g. health care, public safety) requiring composition of power, water, logistics, architecture, etc. TA2 Proposers must define: System complexity – why can’t this be adequately modeled now? Strategy for design framework – how will TA1 breakthroughs help and how will they be implemented? System metrics – what are figures of merit for both design tools & systems being designed? Transition strategy to application community – require open access to design capability and data Must have integrated TA2 prime with TA1 subcontractor teams for phases 2-4 Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)

Example Challenge Problems: Urban Resilience Quantitative metrics to be established for specific proposer focus by government challenge partner Phase 2: Resilience Predict community function in response to adverse event that does not permanently affect structure Example: Blizzard Identify most effective strategy for restoring community function to baseline state (determined at start of phase 2) and demonstrate a novel capability to design a more resilient architecture Phase 3: Adaptation Predict community function in response event that permanently destroys structures and changes behaviors & radically changes constraints Example: Tornado, earthquake Identify most effective strategy for restoring community function to baseline state and alternative designs that are more resilient Phase 4: Living Systems Predict community function in response to adverse event with co-evolving threat with unknown set of time-variable structures, behaviors and constraints Example: Disease outbreak after natural disaster Identify most effective strategy for restoring community function to baseline state and alternative designs that are more resilient Include distributed architectures for computation, sensing and control All images: wikipedia.org Distribution Statement "A" (Approved for Public Release, Distribution unlimited)