Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving

Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving
CS 785 Fall 2004 Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving Modeling expert's reasoning Gheorghe Tecuci Learning Agents Center and Computer Science Department George Mason University

Overview Modeling based on the task reduction paradigm
COG analysis through task reduction Intelligence analysis through task reduction COA critiquing through task reduction Workaround planning through task reduction Guidelines for the modeling process

Definition of modeling
Modeling the problem solving process of a subject matter expert means making explicit the way the expert solves problems. It consists of expressing informally, in English, a problem to be solved, all the intermediary reasoning steps, and the final solution. Modeling is generally the most difficult part of knowledge base and agent development. In general the modeling is performed by the Knowledge Engineer and the Subject Matter Expert, and is based on some general problem solving paradigm, such as task reduction, state space search, or generate and test.

The general task reduction paradigm
A complex problem solving task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained. T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m

Question-answering based task reduction
Let T1 be the problem solving task to be performed. Finding a solution is an iterative process where, at each step, we consider some relevant information that leads us to reduce the current task to a simpler task or to several simpler tasks. The question Q associated with the current task identifies the type of information to be considered. The answer A identifies that piece of information and leads us to the reduction of the current task. T1 S1 Q1 A11 S11 … A1n S1n T1n T11a S11a T11b S11b … Q11b S11b … A11b1 S11b1 S11bm … A11bm T11b1 T11bm

Expertise tasks and task reduction
These are some of the classes of problem solving tasks: Planning Prediction Control Monitoring Critiquing Diagnosis Repair Debugging Identification Design Interpretation Instruction Analysis An important characteristic of each class is that its problem solving tasks can be modeled in a similar way. For example, if we know how to model a specific critiquing task using the task reduction paradigm, than another critiquing task could, in principle, be modeled in a similar way. We will illustrate the modeling of the following types of tasks: center of gravity analysis, intelligence analysis, course of action critiquing, and action planning.

Center of gravity The center of gravity of an entity (state, alliance, coalition, or group) is the foundation of capability, the hub of all power and movement, upon which everything depends, the point against which all the energies should be directed. Carl Von Clausewitz, “On War,” 1832. If a combatant eliminates or influences the enemy’s strategic center of gravity, then the enemy will lose control of its power and resources and will eventually fall to defeat. If the combatant fails to adequately protect his own strategic center of gravity, he invites disaster. (Giles and Galvin, USAWC 1996).

Approach to center of gravity analysis
Centers of Gravity: Primary sources of moral or physical strength, power or resistance. Critical Capabilities: Primary abilities which merit a Center of Gravity to be identified as such in the context of a given scenario, situation or mission. Critical Requirements: Essential conditions, resources and means for a Critical capability to be fully operative. Critical Vulnerabilities: Critical Requirements or components thereof which are deficient, or vulnerable to neutralization, interdiction or attack (moral/physical harm) in a manner achieving decisive results – the smaller the resources and effort applied and the smaller the risk and cost, the better. Joe Strange, Centers of Gravity & Critical Vulnerabilities, 1996.

Identify COG candidates
First computational approach to COG analysis Approach to center of gravity analysis based on the concepts of critical capabilities, critical requirements and critical vulnerabilities, which have been recently adopted into the joint military doctrine. Identify COG candidates Test COG candidates Identify potential primary sources of moral or physical strength, power and resistance from: Test each identified COG candidate to determine whether it has all the necessary critical capabilities: Government Military People Economy Alliances Etc. Which are the critical capabilities? Are the critical requirements of these capabilities satisfied? If not, eliminate the candidate. If yes, do these capabilities have any vulnerability?

Critical capabilities needed to be a COG
leader people military be protected receive communication from the highest level leadership be deployable stay informed exert power communicate desires to the highest level leadership communicate be indispensable be influential support the goal be a driving force support the highest level leadership have support have a positive impact be irreplaceable be influential

will of multi member force
Critical capabilities needed to be a COG (cont.) industrial capacity financial capacity ideology be able to reach the people obtain physical resources obtain funds be able to influence the people acquire weapons transport physical resources to manufacturers be supported by the people process physical resources motivate actions external support will of multi member force transport finished products to military be useful to the supporting force mutual interest be needed by the supported force need of cooperation

Critical capability to Corresponding critical requirement
Leader who is a COG Critical capability to Corresponding critical requirement be protected Have means to be protected from all threats stay informed Have means to receive essential intelligence Have means to communicate with the government, the military and the people communicate Have means to influence the government, the military and the people be influential Have reasons and determination for pursuing the goal be a driving force Have means to secure continuous support from the government, the military and the people have support be irreplaceable Be the only leader to maintain the goal

Critical capability to Corresponding critical requirement
Illustration: Saddam Hussein (Iraq 2003) Critical capability to be protected Corresponding critical requirement Have means to be protected from all threats Means  Vulnerabilities Republican Guard Protection Unit  loyalty can be influenced by US-led coalition Iraqi Military  loyalty can be influenced by US-led coalition  can be destroyed by US-led coalition Complex of Iraqi Bunkers  location known to US led coalition  design known to US led coalition  can be destroyed by US-led coalition System of Saddam Doubles  loyalty of Saddam Doubles to Saddam can be influenced by US-led coalition  can be uncovered by US-led coalition

Formalization of COG analysis: Sicily 1943 example
The will_of_Allied_Forces_1943 is a COG candidate with respect to the cohesion of Allied_Forces_1943 The will of Allied Forces 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for Sicily_1943 . . . What kind of scenario is Sicily_1943? The will_of_Allied_Forces_1943 is a COG candidate with respect to the cohesion of Allied_Forces_1943 Sicily_1943 is a war scenario The will of Allied Forces 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for Sicily_1943 which is a war scenario . . .

The will_of_Allied_Forces_1943 is a COG candidate with respect to the cohesion of Allied_Forces_1943
Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for Sicily_1943 which is a war scenario The will of Allied Forces 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities Which is an opposing force in the Sicily_1943 scenario? . . . Allied_Forces_1943 Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for Allied_Forces_1943 The will_of_Allied_Forces_1943 is a COG candidate with respect to the cohesion of Allied_Forces_1943 Is Allied_Forces_1943 a single-member force or a multi-member force? The will of Allied Forces 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities Allied_Forces_1943 is a multi-member force Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for Allied_Forces_1943 which is a multi-member force . . .

The will_of_Allied_Forces_1943 is a COG candidate with respect to the cohesion of Allied_Forces_1943
Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for Allied_Forces_1943 which is a multi-member force The will of Allied Forces 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities What type of strategic COG candidate should I consider for this multi-member force? . . . The will_of_Allied_Forces_1943 is a COG candidate with respect to the cohesion of Allied_Forces_1943 I consider a candidate corresponding to the multi-member nature of the force Identify and test a strategic COG candidate corresponding to the multi-member nature of Allied_Forces_1943 The will of Allied Forces 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities I consider a candidate corresponding to a member of the multi-member force Identify and test a strategic COG candidate corresponding to a member of the Allied_Forces_1943 . . .

The will_of_the_people_of_US_1943 is a strategic COG candidate with respect to the people_of_US_1943
Identify and test a strategic COG candidate corresponding to a member of the Allied_Forces_1943 The will of people of US 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities Which is a member of Allied_Forces_1943? . . . US_1943 . . . Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for US_1943 What kind of force is US 1943? The will_of_the_people_of_US_1943 is a strategic COG candidate with respect to the people_of_US_1943 US_1943 is a single-member force The will of people of US 1943 is a strategic COG candidate that cannot be eliminated because it has all the necessary critical capabilities Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for US_1943 which is a single-member force . . .

I consider a candidate corresponding to the economy US 1943
Identify and test a strategic COG candidate for US 1943 which is a single-member force . . . What type of strategic COG candidate should I consider for this single-member force? I consider a strategic COG candidate with respect to the people of US 1943 Identify and test a strategic COG candidate with respect to the people of US 1943 . . . I consider a strategic COG candidate with respect to the government of US 1943 Identify and test a strategic COG candidate with respect to the government of US 1943 . . . I consider a strategic COG candidate with respect to the armed forces of US 1943 Identify and test a strategic COG candidate with respect to the armed forces of US 1943 . . . Identify and test a strategic COG candidate corresponding to the economy of US 1943 . . . I consider a candidate corresponding to the economy US 1943 I consider a candidate corresponding to other sources of moral or physical strength, power and resistance of US 1943 Identify and test a strategic COG candidate with respect to other sources of moral or physical strength, power and resistance of US 1943 . . .

Test whether President Roosevelt is a viable strategic COG candidate
President Roosevelt is a strategic COG candidate with respect to the government_of_US_1943 Identify and test a strategic COG candidate with respect to the government of US 1943 President Roosevelt is a strategic COG candidate that can be eliminated because it does not have all the necessary critical capabilities Who or what is a main controlling element of the government_of_US_1943? President Roosevelt that has a critical role in setting objectives and making decisions Identify President Roosevelt as a strategic COG candidate with respect to the government_of_US_1943 President Roosevelt is a strategic COG candidate with respect to the government_of_US_1943 President Roosevelt is a strategic COG candidate that can be eliminated because it does not have all the necessary critical capabilities Test whether President Roosevelt is a viable strategic COG candidate

Test whether President Roosevelt is a viable strategic COG candidate
President Roosevelt is a strategic COG candidate that can be eliminated Which are the critical capabilities that President Roosevelt should have to be a COG candidate? Does President Roosevelt have all the necessary critical capabilities? The necessary critical capabilities are: be protected, stay informed, communicate, be influential, be a driving force, have support and be irreplaceable No. Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be protected President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be protected. President Roosevelt is protected by US Service 1943 which has no significant vulnerability Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to stay informed President Roosevelt has the critical capability to stay informed. President Roosevelt receives essential intelligence from intelligence agencies which have no significant vulnerability Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to communicate President Roosevelt has the critical capability to communicate through executive orders, through military orders, and through the Mass Media of US These communication means have no significant vulnerabilities President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be influential because he is the head of the government of US 1943, the commander in chief of the military of US 1943, and is a trusted leader who can use the Mass Media of US These influence means have no significant vulnerabilities. Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be influential President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be a driving force. The main reason for President Roosevelt to pursue the goal of unconditional surrender of European Axis is “preventing separate peace by the members of the Allied Forces”. Also, “the western democratic values” provides President Roosevelt with determination to persevere in this goal. There is no significant vulnerability in the reason and determination. Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be a driving force President Roosevelt has the critical capability to have support because he is the head of a democratic government with a history of good decisions, a trusted commander in chief of the military, and the people are willing to make sacrifices for unconditional surrender of European Axis. The means to secure continuous support have no significant vulnerability. Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to have support President Roosevelt does not have the critical capability to be irreplaceable. US 1943 would maintain the goal of unconditional surrender of European Axis irrespective of its leader because “the goal was established and the country was committed to it”. There is no significant vulnerability resulted from the replacement of President Roosevelt Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be irreplaceable

Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the government
President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be influential because he is the head of the government of US 1943, the commander in chief of the military of US 1943, and is a trusted leader who can use the Mass Media of US These influence means have no significant vulnerabilities. Test whether President Roosevelt has the critical capability to be influential Which are the critical requirements for President Roosevelt to be influential? Does President Roosevelt satisfy the critical requirements to be influential? President Roosevelt needs means to influence the government, means to influence the military and means to influence the people Yes. President Roosevelt can influence the government of US 1943 because he is the head of the government of US The influence means have no significant vulnerability. Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the government President Roosevelt can influence the military of US 1943 because he is the commander in chief of the military of US The influence means have no significant vulnerability. Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the military The influence of President Roosevelt over the people of US 1943, as a trusted leader using the Mass Media of US 1943, has no significant vulnerability Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the people

Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the government
President Roosevelt can influence the government of US 1943 because he is the head of the government of US The influence means have no significant vulnerability. Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the government What is a means for President Roosevelt to influence the government of US 1943? President Roosevelt is the head of the government of US 1943 Test whether the influence of President Roosevelt over the government of US 1943, as the head of the government of US 1943, has any significant vulnerability The influence of President Roosevelt over the government of US 1943, as the head of the government of US 1943, has no significant vulnerability Does the influence of President Roosevelt over the government of US 1943 have any significant vulnerability? No

Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the military
The influence of President Roosevelt over the military of US 1943, as the commander in chief of the military of US 1943, has no significant vulnerability What is a means for President Roosevelt to influence the military of US 1943? President Roosevelt is the commander in chief of the military of US 1943 Test whether the influence of President Roosevelt over the military of US 1943, as the commander in chief of the military of US 1943, has any significant vulnerability The influence of President Roosevelt over the military of US 1943, as the commander in chief of the military of US 1943, has no significant vulnerability Does the influence of President Roosevelt over the military of US 1943 have any significant vulnerability? No

Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the people
The influence of President Roosevelt over the people of US 1943, as a trusted leader using the Mass Media of US 1943, has no significant vulnerability Test whether President Roosevelt has means to influence the people What is a means for President Roosevelt to influence the people of US 1943? President Roosevelt is trusted by the people of US 1943 and can use Mass Media of US 1943 to influence them Test whether the influence of President Roosevelt over the people of US 1943, as a trusted leader using the Mass Media of US 1943, has any significant vulnerability The influence of President Roosevelt over the people of US 1943, as a trusted leader using the Mass Media of US 1943, has no significant vulnerability Does the influence of President Roosevelt over the people of US 1943 have any significant vulnerability? No

Sample intelligence analysis tasks
Intelligence analysis through task reduction Sample intelligence analysis tasks Identification of the locations where it would be possible to produce illegal drugs, given the presence of plants, buildings, chemicals, transportation equipment (such as trucks or cars), and infrastructure (such as roads, railroads, airstrips, small airports). Detection of likely terrorist activity in a country or location by taking into account the political situation, the transportation network, the buildings, chemicals, biological and/or nuclear materials present, the telecommunications present, the financial backing, the local religion, the local standard of living, as well as vehicles and weapons present or reported to be on site.

Intelligence Analysis through
hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m We envision that the analyst and his/her cognitive assistant will solve intelligence analysis tasks through mixed-initiative reasoning, based on a division of responsibility for those elements of the analysis process for which they have the most aptitude. In essence, the analyst will act as the orchestrator of the analytic process, guiding the high-level exploration while the Disciple agent will implement this guidance, dealing with the associated details. A basic requirement for such a mixed-initiative approach is to develop a model of the analytic process that is both natural for the human analyst and appropriate for automated reasoning. We propose to develop such a model by using a task reduction/solution synthesis paradigm, viewing intelligence analysis as an iterative process of hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis. In this paradigm, a complex analysis task is successively reduced to simpler analysis tasks, solutions to the simplest tasks are found and these solutions are successively composed into a solution for the initial task. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

Assess whether Location-A is a training base for terrorist operations
Intelligence Analysis through hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis Assess whether Location-A is a training base for terrorist operations T1 S1 Let us consider this intelligence analysis task In order to perform this complex assessment task, the analyst and the agent will ask themselves a series of questions. The answer to each question will lead to the reduction of the current assessment task to simpler assessment tasks. T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m Let us consider the task to analyze whether Location_A is a training base for terrorist operations. This analysis task will be solved together by the analyst and his/her Disciple learning agent, following a natural and explicit representation of the thread of logic of the analyst, as if he/she would think aloud: We need to “Assess whether Location_A is a training base for terrorist operations.” In order to perform this complex assessment task, the analyst and the agent will ask themselves a series of questions. The answer to each question will lead to the reduction of the current assessment task to simpler assessment tasks. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

Assess whether Location-A is a training base for terrorist operations
Intelligence Analysis through hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis Assess whether Location-A is a training base for terrorist operations What type of factors should be considered to assess the presence of a terrorist training base? T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis What type of factors should be considered to assess the presence of a terrorist training base? Political environment, physical structures, flow of suspected terrorists, weapons and weapons technology, other suspected bases in the region, and terrorist sympathetic population T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis Political environment, physical structures, flow of suspected terrorists, weapons and weapons technology, other suspected bases in the region, and terrorist sympathetic population Assess whether there is a flow of suspected terrorists in the region of Location-A Assess whether there are other suspected bases for terrorist operations in the region of Location-A T1 S1 Assess whether the political environment would support a training base for terrorist operations at Location-A Assess whether there is terrorist sympathetic population in the region of Location-A T11 S11 … T1n S1n Assess whether the physical structures at Location-A support the existence of a training base for terrorist operations Assess whether there are weapons and weapons technology at Location-A that suggest the presence of a training base for terrorist operations T111 S111 … T11m S11m A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis Assess whether there is a flow of suspected terrorists in the region of Location-A Assess whether there are other suspected bases for terrorist operations in the region of Location-A T1 S1 Assess whether the political environment would support a training base for terrorist operations at Location-A Assess whether there is terrorist sympathetic population in the region of Location-A T11 S11 … T1n S1n Assess whether the physical structures at Location-A support the existence of a training base for terrorist operations Assess whether there are weapons and weapons technology at Location-A that suggest the presence of a training base for terrorist operations T111 S111 … T11m S11m The first question asked is: What type of factors should be considered to assess the presence of a terrorist training base? Its answer Political environment, physical structures, flow of suspected terrorists, weapons and weapons technology, other suspected bases in the region, and terrorist sympathetic population. leads to the decomposition of the top level task into six simpler assessment tasks, one for each identified factor, as shown in this viewgraph. Each such task is further reduced in a similar manner, as shown in the following viewgraphs. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m Let us consider the fourth task. We need to: Assess whether there are weapons and weapons technology at Location-A that suggest the presence of a training base for terrorist operations. What types of weapons and weapons technology suggest the presence of a training base for terrorist operations? Firearms, explosives, chemical and/or biological agents, nuclear weapons, transportation equipment, detonation equipment, dispersal equipment, and assembly equipment. Therefore, in order to make the above assessment, we need to make eight simpler assessments, one for each identified type of weapons and weapons technology. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m Let us consider the second of these required assessments: Assess whether there are explosives at Location-A suggesting a training base for terrorist operations What kind of explosives could indicate the presence of a training base for terrorist operations? Plastic explosives because they have been used in past terrorist attacks. Therefore we need to: Assess whether there are indicators of the presence of plastic explosives at Location-A. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m We need to: Assess whether there are indicators of the presence of plastic explosives at Location-A. What things are indicators of the presence of plastic explosives? Historical evidence of past explosions, presence of explosive experts in the area, presence of detonation equipment, and presence of secure storage facilities. Therefore we need to: Assess whether there is evidence of past use of plastic explosives at Location-A. Assess whether there are explosive experts in the vicinity of Location-A. Assess whether there is evidence of presence of detonation equipment at Location-A. Assess whether there is evidence of presence of secure storage facilities at Location-A. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m The previous viewgraphs illustrated a top-down process of successively reducing a complex assessment task to simpler and simpler assessment tasks. The next step is to find solutions for the simplest tasks, and then (through a bottom-up process) to successively compose these solutions into a solution of the top level task. Let us assume, for instance, that we have found the following solutions of the four bottom tasks: Person-X has reported a plastic explosion on 10 August 2001 at Location-A. Person-E, a known explosive expert, has been seen in the vicinity of Location-A by a credible source, on several occasions. There is a credible report that detonation equipment was brought into the country of Location-A by truck shipment in July 2001. Location-A contains a building with a continuous security guard that may be a storage facility. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m The solution composition process is also guided by a sequence of questions and answers, as illustrated in this viewgraph: Person-X has reported a plastic explosion on 10 August 2001 at Location-A. Person-E, a known explosive expert, has been seen in the vicinity of Location-A by a credible source, on several occasions. There is a credible report that detonation equipment was brought into the country of Location-A by truck shipment in July 2001. Location-A contains a building with a continuous security guard that may be a storage facility. The following question and its answer: What kind of indicators are these for the presence of plastic explosives at Location-A? These are fairly strong indicators. lead Disciple to compose these solutions into Conclude that there are fairly strong indicators of the presence of plastic explosives at Location-A. This is the solution of the task: Assess whether there are indicators of the presence of plastic explosives at Location-A. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis T1 S1 T11 S11 … T1n S1n T111 S111 … T11m S11m This solution composition process continues in a similar way leading to a solution of the assessment task from the top of this viewgraph: Conclude that there are strong indicators that Location-A is a training base for terrorist operations. A complex intelligence analysis task is performed by: successively reducing it to simpler tasks; finding the solutions of the simplest tasks; successively composing these solutions until the solution to the initial task is obtained.

Intelligence Analysis through hypothesis analysis and evidence synthesis
Assess whether there is terrorist sympathetic population in the region of Location-A Assess whether the political environment would support a training base for terrorist operations at Location-A While the agent will attempt to solve the current task together with the analyst, by using all the analyst’s assumptions, it may also check and challenge some of these assumptions, or may explore alternative what if situations. Consider, for instance, the rightmost assessment task from the upper part of this viewgraph: “Assess whether there is terrorist sympathetic population in the region of Location-A.” The analyst may reason under the assumption that there is such a terrorist sympathetic population, and may no longer investigate this issue. However, the Disciple agent may attempt to challenge this assumption by actually trying to solve this assessment task, and alerting the analyst if, for instance, evidence is found that recent events have turned the population against the terrorists. Sometimes there is not enough information to find an answer to some question. In such a case the analyst and Disciple may explore what-if scenarios, each corresponding to a different plausible answer to the question. Notice also that the task reduction paradigm will facilitate the collaboration between multiple analysts and agents, each performing a different subtask of a common task. For instance, the analyst could ask a political expert to “Assess whether the political environment would support a training base for terrorist operations at Location-A.” During this mixed-initiative problem-solving process, the agent will improve itself by learning both from the analyst’s contributions to the reasoning process and from its own contributions.

Critiquing as an expertise task
Critiquing means expressing judgments about something according to certain standards. Example: Identifying the strengths and weaknesses of a military course of action with respect to the principles of war and the tenets of army operations. For instance, assess a particular course of action with respect to the Principle of Surprise.

Course of Action critiquing
Challenge problem in the DARPA’s High Performance Knowledge Bases Program, Identifies strengths and weaknesses in a military course of action based on the principles of war and tenets of army operations. Supports ground combat planning by the commander and staff: - identifies key combat tasks assigned to units; - analyzes ability of units to accomplish their tasks; - evaluates contributions of these tasks to the accomplishment of the mission.

The Course of Action critiquing agent
Source: Challenge problem for the DARPA’s High Performance Knowledge Base (HPKB) program (FY97-99). Background: A military course of action (COA) is a preliminary outline of a plan for how a military unit might attempt to accomplish a mission. After receiving orders to plan for a mission, a commander and staff analyze the mission, conceive and evaluate potential COAs, select a COA, and prepare a detailed plans to accomplish the mission based on the selected COA. The general practice is for the staff to generate several COAs for a mission, and then to make a comparison of those COAs based on many factors including the situation, the commander’s guidance, the principles of war, and the tenets of army operations. The commander makes the final decision on which COA will be used to generate his or her plan based on the recommendations of the staff and his or her own experience with the same factors considered by the staff. Agent task: Identify strengths and weaknesses in a COA, based on the principles of war and the tenets of army operations.

COA411 – the sketch A military COA is a preliminary outline of a plan for how a military unit might attempt to accomplish a mission. It is described by a sketch and by a statement. The COA sketch is a graphical depiction of the preliminary plan being considered. It includes enough of the high level structure and maneuver aspects of the plan to show how the actions of each unit fit together to accomplish the overall purpose. Graphical depiction of a preliminary plan. It includes enough of the high level structure and maneuver aspects of the plan to show how the actions of each unit fit together to accomplish the overall purpose.

COA411 – the statement The COA statement explains what the units in a course of action will do to accomplish the assigned mission. This text includes a description of the mission and the desired end state, as well as standard elements that describe purposes, operations, tasks, forms of maneuver, units, and resources to be used in the COA. The COA statement is expressed in a restricted but expressive subset of English. Explains what the units will do to accomplish the assigned mission.

COA411 – the statement (cont.)

COA critiquing task Answer each of the following questions:
The task of the COA critiquing agent is to identify strengths and weaknesses in a military course of action, based on the principles of war and the tenets of army operations. The agent has to be able to answer questions as the following ones: To what extent does this course of action confirm the principle of mass? or To what extent does this course of action confirm the tenet of initiative?

Modeling the critiquing process: overview
To assess a course of action with respect to a specific principle or tenet one needs a certain amount of information about that course of action, information related to that principle or tenet. This information is obtained by asking a series of questions. The answer to each question allows one to reduce the current assessment task to a more specific and simpler one. This process continues until one has enough information to recognize a weakness or a strength. T1 S1 Q1 … A11 A1n T11a S11 T1n S1n Q11a … A11a1 … A11am S11a1 S11am Each leaf is a solution (a weakness or a strength). The solution corresponding to an intermediate node is the union of the solutions of its immediate children.

The Principle of Surprise (from FM100-5)
Strike the enemy at a time or place or in a manner for which he is unprepared. Surprise can decisively shift the balance of combat power. By seeking surprise, forces can achieve success well out of proportion to the effort expended. Rapid advances in surveillance technology and mass communication make it increasingly difficult to mask or cloak large-scale marshaling or movement of personnel and equipment. The enemy need not be taken completely by surprise but only become aware too late to react effectively. Factors contributing to surprise include speed, effective intelligence, deception, application of unexpected combat power, operations security (OPSEC), and variations in tactics and methods of operation. Surprise can be in tempo, size of force, direction or location of main effort, and timing. Deception can aid the probability of achieving surprise. This is what FM has to say about the Principle of Surprise. As you can see this is a very general description. How to apply this principle is knowledge that is learned by military officers during their life time. Developing an agent able to identify to what extent a specific COA conform to the principle of mass involves representing expert’s knowledge into the agent’s KB.

Sample critique generated by the COA agent
To what extent does this course of action conform to the Principle of Surprise? "There is a strength with respect to surprise in COA411 because the enemy is unlikely to be prepared for the heavy concentration of combat power applied by BLUE-TASK-FORCE1 as MAIN-EFFORT1 in action PENETRATE1. In this action, MAIN-EFFORT1 is applying a force ratio of 10.6 which is more than double the recommended force ratio 3.0. Applying this much combat power for this action is likely to surprise the enemy and is indicative of the proper application of the principle of surprise." Reference: FM pg 2-5, KF 118.1, KF 118.2, KF Surprise is achieved by striking/engaging the enemy in a time, place or manner for which he is unprepared. The enemy can be surprised by the tempo of the operation, the size of the force, the direction or location of the main effort, and timing. Factors contributing to surprise include speed, effective intelligence, deception, application of unexpected combat power, operations security, and variations in tactics and methods of operation.

application of surprising
coa411-surprise Assess COA411 with respect to the Principle of Surprise Does COA411 assign appropriate surprise, deception, or counter-reconnaissance actions? I consider the presence of surprise factors I consider enemy reconnaissance Assess surprise in COA411 with respect to the presence of surprise factors Assess surprise in COA411 with respect to countering enemy reconnaissance Continues on next slide I consider the application of surprising levels of combat power I consider the presence of deception actions Assess surprise in COA411 with respect to the application of surprising levels of combat power Assess surprise in COA411 with respect to the presence of deception actions

coa411-surprise Continues from previous slide
Assess surprise in COA411 with respect to countering enemy reconnaissance Is an enemy reconnaissance unit present? Yes, RED-CSOP1 which is performing the reconnaissance action SCREEN1 No, ... Assess surprise in COA411 where the enemy unit RED-CSOP1 performs the reconnaissance action SCREEN1 Continues on next slide

… coa411-surprise Continues from previous slide
Assess surprise in COA411 where the enemy unit RED-CSOP1 performs the reconnaissance action SCREEN1 Is the enemy reconnaissance unit destroyed? No, ... Yes, RED-CSOP1 is destroyed by DESTROY1 … ASSESSMENT: There is a strength with respect to surprise in COA411 because it contains aggressive security/counter-reconnaissance plans, destroying enemy intelligence collection units and activities. Intelligence collection by RED-CSOP1 through SCREEN1 will be disrupted by its destruction by DESTROY1. This and similar actions prevent the enemy for ascertaining the nature and intent of friendly operations, thereby increasing the likelihood that the enemy will be surprised. This is a strength of high importance. REFERENCE: FM pg 2-5, KF 118.1, KF 118.2, KF Surprise is achieved by striking/engaging the enemy in a time, place or manner for which he is unprepared. The enemy can be surprised by the tempo of the operation, the size of the force, the direction or location of the main effort, and timing. Factors contributing to surprise include speed, effective intelligence, deception, application of unexpected combat power, operations security, and variations in tactics and methods of operation.

Modeling based on COA421 COA 4.2.1

coa421-surprise Assess COA421 with respect to the Principle of Surprise Does COA421 assign appropriate surprise, deception, or counter-reconnaissance actions? I consider enemy reconnaissance Assess surprise in COA421 with respect to countering enemy reconnaissance Is an enemy reconnaissance unit present? Yes, RED-CSOP1 which is performing the reconnaissance action SCREEN1 Assess surprise in COA421 where the enemy unit RED-CSOP1 performs the reconnaissance action SCREEN1 Is the enemy reconnaissance unit destroyed? No, RED-CSOP1 is not destroyed ASSESSMENT: There is a weakness with respect to surprise in COA421 because the intelligence collection by RED-CSOP1 through SCREEN1 will not be disrupted. Therefore the enemy may ascertain the nature and intent of friendly operations, thereby decreasing the likelihood that the enemy will be surprised. This is a weakness of high importance. REFERENCE: FM pg 2-5, KF 118.1, KF 118.2, KF Surprise is achieved by striking/engaging the enemy in a time, place or manner for which he is unprepared. The enemy can be surprised by the tempo of the operation, the size of the force, the direction or location of the main effort, and timing. Factors contributing to surprise include speed, effective intelligence, deception, application of unexpected combat power, operations security, and variations in tactics and methods of operation.

The Principle of Mass (from FM100-5)
Mass the effects of overwhelming combat power at the decisive place and time. Synchronizing all the elements of combat power where they will have decisive effect on an enemy force in a short period of time is to achieve mass. To mass is to hit the enemy with a closed fist, not poke at him with fingers of an open hand. Mass must also be sustained so the effects have staying power. Thus, mass seeks to smash the enemy, not sting him. This results from the proper combination of combat power with the proper application of other principles of war. Massing effects, rather than concentrating forces, can enable numerically inferior forces to achieve decisive results, while limiting exposure to enemy fire. As you can see this is a very general description. How to apply this principle is knowledge that is learned by military officers during their life time. Developing an agent able to identify to what extent a specific COA conform to the principle of mass involves representing expert’s knowledge into the agent’s KB.

Sample critiques generated by the COA agent
To what extent does this course of action conform to the Principle of Mass? There is a major strength in COA411 with respect to mass because BLUE-TASK-FORCE1 is the MAIN-EFFORT1 and it acts on the decisive point of the COA (RED-MECH-COMPANY4) with a force ratio of 10.6, which exceeds a recommended force ratio of Additionally, the main effort is assisted by supporting action SUPPRESS-MILITARY-TASK1 which also acts on the decisive point. This is good evidence of the allocation of significantly more than minimum combat power required at the decisive point and is indicative of the proper application of the principle of mass. There is a strength in COA411 with respect to mass because BLUE-TASK-FORCE1 is the main effort of the COA and it has been allocated 33% of available combat power but this is considered just a medium level weighting of the main effort. There is a strength in COA411 with respect to mass because BLUE-MECH-COMPANY8 is a COMPANY-UNIT-DESIGNATION level maneuver unit assigned to be the reserve. This is considered a strong reserve for a BRIGADE-UNIT-DESIGNATION level COA and would be available to continue the operation or exploit success. Reference: FM pg 2-4, KF 113.1, KF 113.2, KF 113.3, KF 113.4, KF To mass is to synchronize the effects of all elements of combat power at the proper point and time to achieve decisive results. Observance of the Principle of Mass may be evidenced by allocation to the main effort of significantly greater combat power than the minimum required throughout its mission, accounting for expected losses. Mass is evidenced by the allocation of significantly more than minimum combat power required at the decisive point.

coa411-mass I need to Assess COA411 with respect to the Principle of Mass Does COA411 identify a decisive point? Yes, it identifies the decisive point RED-MECH-COMPANY4. Therefore I need to Assess mass for COA411 with RED-MECH-COMPANY4 as the decisive point Does the main effort act on RED-MECH-COMPANY4 with an adequate force ratio? Yes, it acts with a force ratio of 10.6 Therefore I need to Assess mass for COA411 when the main effort acts on RED-MECH-COMPANY4 with the adequate force ratio of 10.6. Does the main effort get help acting on RED-MECH-COMPANY4? Yes, it gets help from the supporting action SUPPRESS1, which also acts on RED-MECH-COMPANY4. Therefore I conclude that There is a major strength in COA411 with respect to mass because BLUE-TASK-FORCE1 is the MAIN-EFFORT1 and it acts on the decisive point of the COA (RED-MECH-COMPANY4) with a force ratio of 10.6, which exceeds a recommended force ratio of 3.0. Additionally, the main effort is assisted by the supporting action SUPPRESS1 which also acts on the decisive point. This is good evidence of the allocation of significantly more than minimum combat power required at the decisive point and is indicative of the proper application of the principle of mass.

The Disciple-COA agent
Double-click on Disciple-HPKB Disciple Server Window: Select Server  Start Server then click OK Double-click on JDisciple(HPKB). Connect Disciple Client Window: Select Agent  Select Domain. In the opened window select COA-demo Select Agent  Load Instances. In the opened window select coa411 Solutions  View Input Problem … Solutions  Generate Solutions. Select Surprise and Offensive. Click Evaluate Click on cpa SURPRISE … Solutions  Close Instances

Answers for Surprise

Abstract Justifications for answers.

More detailed justifications for answers.

Most detailed justifications for Answers.

Planning as an expertise task
Planning means developing a sequence of actions that achieve a desired goal. Examples: Develop a plan for a military unit to reconstitute or bypass damage to an infrastructure, such as a damaged bridge, tunnel or road. Develop a plan of how to manufacture a loudspeaker. Develop a plan of how to travel from one location to another.

Workaround planning through task reduction
Estimate enemy’s best way of working around damage to a transportation infrastructure, such as a damaged bridge or a cratered road. Input problem description of a military unit that needs to work around some damage description of the damage and of the terrain description of the resources in the area that could be used to repair the damage Solution detailed plan of actions minimum duration expected duration resources link capacity

Damaged bridge but no mines.
Modeling fragment Workaround obstacle by unit10 What is the type of obstacle? Tunnel Bridge at site100. Crater Workaround bridge obstacle at site100 by unit10 What is the type of damage to the bridge? Mined and damaged bridge. Damaged bridge but no mines. Only mines Workaround unmined damaged bridge at site100 by unit10 What type of workaround strategy to adopt? Repair the bridge. Ford the river. Ford damaged bridge at site100 by unit10

… … … … Modeling fragment (cont.) Prepare river banks at site103
using bulldozer-unit201 to allow fording by unit10 What bank needs to be prepared? Both site107 and site105 need to be reduced because their slopes are too steep for unit10. Reduce the slope of site107 by direct cut using bulldozer-unit201 to allow the fording by unit10 Reduce the slope of site105 by direct cut using bulldozer-unit201 to allow the fording by unit10 Ford bulldozer-unit201 at site103 … … …

General guidelines Partition the domain into classes of problems.
Select representative problems for each class. Model one class at a time. Model one example solution at a time. Organize the top level part of the problem solving tree to identify the class of the problem.

Partition the domain into classes of problems
Center of gravity analysis Multimember nature of force Opposing force1 Government Single state War scenario People Military Type of scenario Opposing force2 Economy Operations other than war

Critical capabilities Critical requirements Critical vulnerabilities Center of gravity analysis be protected stay informed communicate leader be influential Government be a driving force organization have support be irreplaceable

Course of action critiquing
Partition the domain into classes of problems Course of action critiquing Each principle and tenet leads to a different class of critiquing task.

Workaround reasoning Workaround damaged tunnels Workaround damaged bridges with fording Workaround damaged bridges with fixed bridges Workaround damage Workaround damaged bridges Workaround damaged bridges with floating bridges Workaround damaged bridges with rafts Workaround damaged roads

Specific guidelines for the modeling process
1. Identify the problem to be solved, then form a task name by writing a clear, thorough, natural language sentence describing that problem. 2. Follow each task or sub-task with a single, concise, question relevant to solving the named task. - Ask small, incremental questions that are likely to have a single category of answer (but not necessarily a single answer). This usually means ask “who”, or “what”, or “where”, or “what kind of”, or “is this or that” etc., not complex questions such as “who and what”, or “what and where”, 3. Follow each question with one or more answers to that question. - Express answers as complete sentences, restating key elements of the question in the answer. - Even well formed, simple questions are likely to generate multiple answers. Select the answer that corresponds to the example solution being modeled and continue down that branch. Go back and explore possible branches in a solution tree when you are ready to model a new example solution.

Specific guidelines for the modeling process (cont.)
4. Evaluate the complexity of each question and its answers. When a question leads to apparently overly complex answers, especially answers that contain an “and” condition, rephrase the question in a simpler, more incremental manner leading to simpler answers. 5. For each answer, form a new sub-task, or several sub-tasks, or a solution corresponding to that answer, by writing a clear, thorough, natural language sentence describing the new sub-tasks or solution. - To the extent that it is practical, incorporate key relevant phrases and elements of preceding task names in sub-task names to portray the expert’s chain of problem solving thought and the accumulation of relevant knowledge. - If the answer has led to several sub-tasks, then model their solutions in a depth-first order.

Specific guidelines for the modeling process (cont.)
6. After completing a solution tree for an example solution, revisit the potential branches of that tree to model additional example solutions within that category of solutions, reusing existing model components to the greatest extent possible. Utilize the tools and learning ability of Disciple to the greatest extent possible to minimize the amount of modeling required. Only completely model solutions that are unique in their entirety. Entirely unique solutions will be rare.

Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Knowledge Acquisition and Problem Solving"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback