1. Semantics, Interoperability, Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium & SICoP John Yanosy (Rockwell Collins) – Chair Semantic Interoperability Framework WG Hans Polzer (Lockheed Martin) – Chair SCOPE WG Todd Schneider (Raytheon)

2. 2 Agenda  NCOIC Introduction  NCOIC & Interoperability  Interoperability & Semantics –Semantic Interoperability Framework WG  Interoperability & Big Picture –SCOPE WG  URL’s –NCOIC – http://www.ncoic.org –SICoP - http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP

3. 3 NCOIC Vision & Mission Vision Mission Our mission is to facilitate the global realization of Network Centric Operations. We seek to enable interoperability across the spectrum of joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multinational industrial and commercial operations. NCOIC is global, with membership open to those who wish to apply the vast potential of network centric technology to the operational challenges faced by our nations and their citizens. Information Architecture Comm & Networking Architecture System A System B System C NCO Industry working together with our customers to provide a network centric environment where all classes of information systems interoperate by integrating existing and emerging open standards into a common evolving global framework that employs a common set of principles and processes.

4. 4  Broad Membership –Currently 100 Member Organizations from 19 countries, including Leading IT, Aerospace & Defense companies Government organizations Non-Governmental Organizations Academic Institutions  Experienced Advisory Council –24 key global government and civilian customers –Representatives from Australia, France, Germany, Italy, NATO, Sweden, UK, & the US  Growing Government Relationships –ASD(NII), Australia DoD, DHS, DISA, European Defence Agency, FAA, JFCOM, NATO, SPAWAR, Swedish FMV (The Swedish Defence Materiel Administration) NCOIC - At A Glance

5. 5 NCOIC Membership Comes From These Countries AustraliaCanadaDenmarkFinlandFrance GermanyItalyIrelandIsrael NetherlandsPolandRomaniaSpain South Korea Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom United States NCOIC welcomes global membership Belgium

6. 6 100 Member Companies & Organizations in NCOIC Just a few of the names that you might recognize…

7. 7 Affiliate Council Members Executive Operations Committee Technical Council Functional Teams & Working Groups Strategy Committee Marcom Committee Membership Committee Executive Council Advisory Council Staff Executive Director NCOIC Organization

8. 8 Functional Teams  Building Blocks Functional Team (FT): Identifies elements that help enable interoperability for interested stakeholders. Products identified as an “NCOIC Certified Interoperability Building Block” can be trusted to exhibit NIF-identified characteristics of interoperability.  Integrated Project Teams (IPTs): Customer-facing teams whose role is to aggregate the technical deliverables of the various technical functional teams in support of specific customer missions.  Modeling, Simulation, Testing and Evaluation FT: Utilizes techniques and laboratories to test, validate and / or demonstrate increased levels of interoperability resulting from use of NCOIC deliverables. Demonstrates effectiveness of NCOIC concepts and deliverables to foster interoperability between NCOIC member and government labs.  Net-Centric Assessment FT: Develops tools for use by systems engineers to determine the level of Netcentricity that has been achieved in systems. The Net-Centric Assessment Tool (NCAT™) exists as both an engine for performing assessments, and independent content files for use in operational domains.  NIF Architecture Concepts FT: Develops enabling guidance that system engineers can use to develop systems-of-systems capabilities. This construct consists of architectural principles, patterns, and Protocol Functional Collections (PFCs).  Requirements Validation FT: Develops and promotes models and practices useful to customers and member companies for validating requirements in a network centric environment.  Specialized Frameworks FT: Identifies specialized frameworks and patterns compliant with the guidelines, content, and scope specified by the NIF™. The team populates the NIF library with PFCs that are consistent with the NCO tenants and other technical principles, focusing on specific technical domains affecting network centric interoperable architectural solutions.  Systems Engineering and Integration FT: Integrates efforts and promotes NCOIC FT deliverables for accomplishing NCOIC goals and objectives.

9. 9 NCOIC Terms  Network-Centric: –Related to systems and patterns of behavior that are influenced significantly or enabled by current and emergent networks and network technologies. Often these center around IP-based internetworking, but the term is sometimes used to include any type of enabling network.  Network-Centric Operations (NCO): –An information superiority-enabled concept of operations that generates increased combat power by networking sensors, decision makers, and shooters to achieve shared awareness, increased speed of command, higher tempo of operations, greater lethality, increased survivability and a greater degree of self-synchronization. Net-Centricity necessarily requires interoperability

10. 10 NCO Theme "Net Centricity A full contact Social Sport" Hans Polzer (Lockheed Martin )

11. 11 NCOIC & Interoperability  (DOD/NATO) The ability of systems, units, or forces to provide services to, and accept services from other systems, units, or forces and to use the services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively together. (Joint Pub 1-02)  (DOD only) The condition achieved among communications-electronics systems or items of communications-electronics equipment when information or services can be exchanged directly and satisfactorily between them and/or their users. The degree of interoperability should be defined when referring to specific cases. (Joint Pub 1-02)  (NATO) The ability to operate in synergy in the execution of assigned tasks. (AAP-6 [2005])  (IEEE) … the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged  (Wikipedia) Interoperability is connecting people, data and diverse systems. The term can be defined in a technical way or in a broad way, taking into account social, political and organizational factors.

12. 12 Interoperability & Semantics  Hypothesis No ‘true’ interoperability without Semantic interoperability  Semantics is everywhere –Between people –Between organizations –Between people and systems –Between systems and sensors –Between systems –Between software elements –Between protocols –Between network services and clients, users of services –Between information systems and creators/users of information –Between different organizations and expectations about uses of systems and information –Between definitions of concepts between people in different contexts

13. 13 Semantic Interoperability Framework Working Group John Yanosy, Chair

14. 14 Semantic Interoperability Framework (SIF) WG Charter This project will develop the NIF Semantic Interoperability (SIF) Framework, a sub-framework of the NCOIC NIF overarching framework. The SIF framework in this context will include:  Development of an evolving technology and capability map of all of the relevant concepts and technologies associated with this domain,  Development of a clear and unambiguous definition of semantic interoperability,  Identification and description of the impact that various levels of semantic interoperability can have on networked operations,  Evolution of an overarching semantic interoperability model,  Identification and taxonomic classification of the semantic interoperability problems and examples of within various applications,  Development of semantic interoperability principles and tenets,  Identification and development of semantic interoperability architecture patterns.  Emerging technology concepts will also be discussed as to their scope of problem solution and possibly their maturity level and related standards.

15. 15 SIF WG Objectives  Develop a comprehensive understanding of the problems of semantic interoperability in a NCO environment  Define a semantic interoperability framework (SIF) where the scope and role of each problem can be illustrated and where problem specific architectural pattern solutions can be integrated (Services, Situational, and Knowledge Sharing domains)  Investigate, describe, and provide guidance in the use of semantic technologies and standards that supports mutually consistent understanding of shared information  Develop NCO Capability Specific Semantic Interoperability Patterns  Semantic Interoperability Concept Map  Develop Semantic Interaction Model –Based on speech acts –Characterizing intention (sufficient for NCO)  Lexicon

16. 16 SIF Concept Map

17. 17 Operations Linguistics Philosophy NCOIC Semantic Interoperability Space Knowledge Representation Computer Science Cognitive Systems Systems Engineering SI Net Centric Ops Logic

18. 18 NCOIC Semantic Interoperability Principles  Interoperability between systems and agents is –Purposeful –Informed by goals, –Operating in contexts –Sharing domain knowledge (whether explicit or implied).  Goals guide selection of intentions and execution of actions  Communications occur within a few universal intentional categories (Speech Acts – request knowledge, commit to action, request action, … )  Context constrains relevant domain knowledge for a situation  Useful Knowledge is organized in semantic domain models

19. 19 Systems, Capabilities, Operations, Programs, and Enterprises (SCOPE) Model Hans Polzer, Chair

20. 20 SCOPE WG Charter ─ Develop and evolve means to characterize requirements for network centric systems ─ Work with Engineering Process Team, IPTs and NCAT WGs to enable and learn from application of this characterization means to actual capability development SCOPE MODEL

21. 21 What is the SCOPE Model?  SCOPE Purpose –Describe the degree a set of Systems supports a Capability, Operation, Program or Enterprise (SCOPE) over a network  SCOPE provides a means to characterize interoperability requirements for network centric systems –How isolated or connected are the systems/organizations to each other? –How isolated or connected are the systems/organizations to their environment? –What are the intended purposes of the connection between systems? –How feasible is the system?

22. 22 NCO Layers of Interoperability Data/Object Model Interoperability Connectivity & Network Interop. Physical Interoperability Semantic/Information Interoperability Knowledge/Awareness of Actions Aligned Procedures Aligned Operations Harmonized Strategy/Doctrines Political or Business Objectives Organizational Interoperability Technical Interoperability Layers of Interoperability Network Transport Information & Services People & Process NEEDS CONSTRAINTS

23. 23 SCOPE Model Dimensions Broad & Specific  Net Readiness Dimension set –Measures how open and adaptable component systems are to working with each other over the network  Capability Scope Dimension set (two) –One for DOMAIN SPECIFIC characteristics, One for DOMAIN INDEPENDENT characteristics –Measures how broad, deep, and diverse the operational architectures are that the systems are designed to support and adapt to  Technical Feasibility Dimension set –Measures how feasible it is to achieve desired operational capabilities, given the systems and their information exchanges over the available network using established technical standards and infrastructure services

24. 24 Scope Dimensions – Version 1

25. 25 DoDAF Architecture Views and SCOPE Dimensions OPERATIONAL VIEWS SYSTEM VIEWS TECHNICAL STANDARDS VIEWS Identifies Participant Relationships and Information Needs Relates Capabilities & Characteristics to Operational Requirements Prescribes Standards and Conventions BROAD NARROW CAPABILITY SCOPE LEVELS Which Systems Interact? About What? How Much? (and Why?) To What Effect? HIGH LOW TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY LEVELS Can Capability be achieved with Current Stds & Technologies? Are New Stds or Changes Needed? Is the information Obtainable, Accurate, timely? NET-READY LEVELS What do Systems say to each other? How is this information represented? OPEN CLOSED

26. 26 Examples of Net-Ready SCOPE Dimensions & Levels Value Dimension Tighter Coupling / Less Net-Readiness Looser Coupling / More Net-Readiness Service DiscoveryService specs pub at design Service specs pub run-time OWL spec for Services Comparative service select Information DiscoveryStatic IndexesMetadata NavigationRelevance MeasuresContext-driven Search Info Model Pre- Agreement Complex data & doctrine Standard XML Schemas Business ObjectASCII, URLs Information Assurance Link encrypt - SSL Single sign-on support DoD-Wide PKI support MSL, cross- domain spprt Autonomic NetworkingDesign Time Configuration Run Time Re- Configuration Dynamic Net Management Adaptive Net Management Semantic Interoperability No Explicit Semantics Semantic Metadata for Interfaces Ontology-based interfaces Dynamic Ontology mapping

27. 27 Examples of Capability-Independent SCOPE Dimensions and Levels Overall Scope and Types of Enterprise Single UnitSingle Service or AgencyDoD-WideWorld-Wide Capability BreadthSingle Functional Domain/Service Multi-Domain, Multi- Service Multi-Dept, NGO, IndustryCoalition, Multi-Enterprise Type Capability DepthSingle LevelTwo LevelsThree EchelonsFour or More Echelons Organizational Model and Culture Rigid Hierarchy, Vertically Integrated Adaptive Hierarchy, Interact Horizontally Flat, Empowered, Open to Partnering Adaptive, Social, Interdependent Unity of Life Cycle Control/Alignment Single DoD Acquis. ExecMultiple DoD Acquis. ExecDoD & US Syst. OwnersMulti-National Syst. Owners Acquisition Congruence (SD)All Systems on Same Timeline Timeline within 2 yearsTimeline within 5 yearsTimelines >5 years apart Semantic InteroperabilitySingle Domain VocabularyMulti-Domain VocabularySingle LanguageMultiple Languages Operational Context (SD)Single Ops ContextMultiple Ops ContextsFuture/Past IntegrationHypothetical Entities Value Dimension Narrower Scope Broader Scope

28. 28 Examples of Technical Feasibility Dimensions Inter-System Time Binding to Achieve Capability StrategicTacticalTransactionalReal Time Run-Time Computing Resources Needed <1% of existing system resources 1-10%10-50%>50% of existing system resources Service Mgmt. Resources Needed NegligibleWithin Current Net Service Capacity Within Planned Net Service Capacity Beyond Planned Net Service Capacity Net Resources Needed (FD) NegligibleWithin Current Net Capacity Within Planned Net Capacity Beyond Planned Net Capacity Interface Development Complexity <1% of system size1-10%10-50%>50% of system size Technology Readiness Level For Net Use TRL Levels 8-9TRL Levels 6-7TRL Levels 4-5TRL Levels 1-3 Value Dimension Smaller Risk Larger Risk

29. 29 SCOPE Model Summary  SCOPE is a comprehensive, balanced approach to assessing sets of systems from a net centric operations perspective –Evolved through application against real programs –Yet has an overarching perspective on the problem space, semi- orthogonal to architecture frameworks (FEAF, DoDAF, Zachman, etc.)  SCOPE is a “Goldilocks” model –No preconceived value for any given degree of net-centricity –Value depends on operational objectives of target system sponsors Desired degree of agility Desired degree of operational/resource scope  SCOPE has potential to be a net-centric content-based complement to CMMI to characterize what is built vice how –But focused more on “best fit” to the problem domain rather than “maturity” or “level” based Helps position programs/systems in the larger ecosystem of institutional goals and capabilities; Identifies interoperability gaps

30. 30  NCOIC – http://www.ncoic.orghttp://www.ncoic.org  SICoP - http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP