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

2. 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 ???

3. 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.

4. Accomplishments

5. 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

6. Overall GANNT

7. Experiment ’08 GANNT

8. 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)

9. 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

10. Better Use Case Design
EA Datasets
Lessons Learned

11. 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!

12. 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

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

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

15. DoDAF 2.0 Meta Model (Version 0.1) Overview

16. Uses IDEAS Foundation and Common Patterns

17. 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

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