1. Shared Operational Context: A Needed Transformation
Erik Chaum
NUWC S&T Presentation
July 2002

2. Team
Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Advanced Systems and Concepts)
Mr. Dick Lee
Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Division Newport
Mr. Erik Chaum
Mr. Ernie Correia
Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey
Dr. Don Brutzman
Institute for Defense Analysis
Dr. Gene Simaitis
Dr. Francisco Loaiza
Collaborative effort. Team leaders.

3. Outline NCW Challenge An essential trilogy Opportunity: Generic Hub
ACTD 01: C4I Coalition Warfare
Future Opportunities
My remarks today will follow this outline.
I would first like to characterize some of the inherent NCW Challenges. Share with you some insights we have appropriately named “Trilogy”. These insights lead us to an exciting Opportunity namely the NATO Generic Hub. I will review with our initial efforts in this direction under the C4I Coalition Warfare ACTD 01.

4. NCW Challenge
Information Age transformation of war fighting systems and processes.
More than connectivity.
Broad tactical and operational shared-awareness. This type of sophisticated shared understanding will leading to improved synchronization of effects, speed of command and effectiveness.
Ubiquitous Interoperability & Info Sharing
The ability to work together: Intra-service, Joint, Coalition
Are we progressing to the goal? Are all the pieces in place - just more time and funding required?
NCW is no less than the embodiment of an information age transformation of the US DoD.* [Click] It involves a new way of thinking about how we accomplish our mission, organize, acquire and field systems. It is a long term transformation.
It is more than connectivity. Its tenets include information sharing that improves shared situational awareness. This in turn enables collaboration, self-synchronization and enhances speed of command. [Click]
This vision in which there is ubiquitous interoperability and information sharing must support Joint and Coalition operations.
Further, we must recognize that underlying this vision is the implicit statement that our information systems must aid across an increasing scope of functions, and processes where in the past the warfighter alone had the requisite situational understanding to make appropriate decisions. [Click]
Are we progressing to the NCW vision/goal? Do we have all of the pieces identified and now it is only a question of engineering and funding? Or are there fundamental elements to be discovered and integrated into the way we operate and develop systems?
Decision & Information Superiority resulting
in more timely, relevant, and accurate effects.

5. An Analogy Military decision maker Scenario
Intelligent part of today’s system
Scenario
Well trained
Perfect Tactical Picture
Decision makers Need Context to make decisions
To address this question, at least in part, consider this analogy. [Click]
People are an integral part of today’s C2 and tactical systems. They are the intelligent, autonomous and collaborating agents within our processes. They are able to process, prioritize, and present information in ways that aid decision-makers and decision making. [Click]
Even so, well trained watch standers with only an understanding of the tactical picture are unable perform their duties. [Click]
Decision makers need operational context to make decisions. [Click]
Today operational context is maintained in the warfighter part of our tactical and command and control systems.
In the NCW vision information systems provide sophisticated assistance, but this can only happen if these systems, like the people they support, have an understanding of the operational context within which they must operate.
Operational Context is today maintained in the warfighter “part” of tactical and command and control systems.

6. NCW Foundation Pillars
Trilogy
Operational
Context
Interoperability
Automation
Shared
Understanding
Let us consider then what might be critical foundational pillars that enable NCW capabilities. [Click]
NCW is by definition the application of information age technology and ideas to warfare and supporting operations. This explicitly includes the wide spread use of automation in both manned and autonomous systems and processes. This would be to share the commander’s guidance and situational awareness, as well as to self-synchronize. Information system automation aiding in all respects required to speed command and increase mission effectiveness. [Click]
NCW, again by definition, leverages connectivity, necessary but not sufficient to provide the goal of interoperability. Focusing here on information systems [and not other dimensions of interoperability - e.g., cultural]. Interoperability must address adequately the scope of information to be exchanged and the technical means that support implementation. [Click]
A third pillar is necessarily the Operational Context we have already mentioned. It must be able to both represent and exchange operational context information on the NCW grid. [Click]
Thus, these pillars form a critical “Trilogy” that is essential for achieving shared understanding in the NCW environment. All are required.
NCW Foundation Pillars

7. Operational Context
Situational Awareness includes shared understanding regarding:
the scope of operations
command relationships
task force order of battle
mission assignments/ objectives
Commander's Intent
rules of engagement (ROE)
coordination guidelines
schedule of operations
communication schedules
battlespace management (e.g., waterspace management)
sensor employment and management plans/guidance
threat assessment
environmental guidance
Family of Interoperable Operational Pictures [FIOP]
Situational awareness is based on shared understanding, of both the common tactical picture and a wide range of operational context information including:
the scope of operations, command relationships, task force order of battle, mission assignments/objectives, Commander's Intent, rules of engagement (ROE) , coordination guidelines, battlespace management (e.g., waterspace management), schedule of operations, sensor management plans, threat assessment, and environmental guidance.
A decision maker with a perfect common tactical picture (provided by the FIOP), but without this type of information, will be uncertain what to do! [Click]
A true transformation of military and supporting operations will be enabled when this information, understood by the warfighter, can also be understood by our future NCW information systems. When our systems understand this range of information they will be empowered to assist decision makers with the planning and coordination.
This information and knowledge is understood by people, and must be available and used by automated systems!

8. Goal: Shared Understanding
Independent, incompatible models create unsolvable interoperability problems.
Classification Uncertainty Models:
Data Fusion Sys #1:
60% Sub
30% Ship
10% Helo
Data Fusion Sys #2:
Unk
Sub
Ship
Air =
Shared understanding is essential for effective communications and interoperability. It is also true that independent incompatible models create unsolvable interoperability problems.
Consider this example in which two unique classification uncertainty models - [Click] this one providing a probabilistic description, and [Click] this one providing a single option description - [Click] result in lost information. [Click]
That is there is no unambiguous mapping between these two models/systems and thus no, or limited, shared understanding.
Thus a shared model, or ontology, of the information to be represented, its semantics, syntax, and associated meta-data are required for effective shared understanding and interoperability. Complete data interoperability demands use of a common ontology.
The transformation sought for DoD requires an ontology suitable for sharing Operational Context.
There is no unambiguous mapping between these two models - information is lost, imprecise understanding.

9. Future NCW Systems: Sensor and Context Driven
Global Information Grid
Operational
Context Service
Context Driven
Sensor Driven
FIOP Service
Applications
Agents
Autonomous
Systems
If we step back a minute, another way to appreciate what I have been presenting is that today the applications, intelligent agents, and autonomous systems we have, or will develop, focus on sensing the world and building a shared Family of Interoperable Operational Pictures - but the emphasis is on representing the tactical track estimated state. [Click]
If the future we want to be able to represent and share operational context so that our information systems are context-aware or context-driven. [Click]
This dual influence will drive collaboration and self synchronization as well as improving speed of command.
Sensing

10. Implementation Considerations
Hierarchical Process
Each echelon adds additional information
Top-down
Shared understanding across the range of battlespace information
New Interoperability Standards required
Workload
Country, Service, System, Application, Technology, Contractor Independent
Generic, Cross-Cutting and Unifying
How do we build and share context? Today it is a hierarchical, top-down process. Each echelon adds detail to an operations order, or the daily intentions message as required.
For NCW operations we must likewise facilitate the generation and updating of operational context information. A new standard that addresses the broad scope of battlespace information we have been discussing must be asserted. We must ensure that information is shared and that the warfighter is not a data entry clerk for our “smart automated” systems.
Last, and perhaps most important, we need an ontology to express this battlespace information that is Country, Service, System, Application, Technology, and Contractor independent. That is generic, appropriate to all and specific to none.

11. Capability Gaps GH4 N Top-down “Unified” Bottom-up “Negotiated” N2
Global Exchange
Ontology
GH4 N
Top-down
“Unified”
Bottom-up
“Negotiated” N2
Capability
Shortfall
Today there is much effort being applied to improving military operations through the interfacing of many component systems. This N-squared approach relies on point-to-point information exchanges, typically of limited scope. [Click] This bottom-up approach can provide near-term improvements but will fall short of the NCW objective capability, because it does not promote broad shared situational awareness and understanding. It is also expensive. [Click]
To achieve the NCW objective capability we must work top-down, through a share understanding and ability to use operational context, based on a shared ontology. This would be a critical and empowering transformation. [Click] But where do we get this global exchange ontology - is this too hard as the first step? [Click]
The good news is that such a rich ontology does in fact exist - it is known as Generic Hub version 4.
Today
NCW
Objective
Capability

12. NATO Reference Model
NATO Battlespace Operational Context model: Land C2 Information Exchange Data Model (LC2IEDM), or GH5 (Generic Hub version 5)
Countries use it for C2 systems interface definition
Draft NATO STANAG (ADat-P32).
Work progressing on GH5
Provides a rational mature framework for interoperability and exploring more sophisticated automation methods.
NATO Battlespace Operational Context model: Land C2 Information Exchange Data Model (LC2IEDM), or GH4 (Generic Hub version 4)
Countries use it for C2 systems interface definition
Draft NATO STANAG (ADat-P32).
GH5 published March 02 - richer, more Joint, still generic.
Provides a rational mature framework for interoperability and exploring more sophisticated NCW/automation methods.

13. GH4: Basic Entities Battlefield objects and types:
Facility Feature Materiel Organization Person etc.
Entity-Relationship Model: [not a list of data]
Key information entities, and
relational meta-information
GH provides a way of describing who, what, where, when, how, and why. It is very generic, joint, and coalition by design. Explicitly designed to ensure data interoperability.
Technical implementation is hardware and software independent, another important transformational attribute.

14. NATO Land Command and Control Information Exchange Data Model
Basic Entities
Battlefield objects and types
Facility Feature Materiel
Organisation Person
Situational Awareness
Plans, Orders, Requests
Capability
Reporting Data
Entity-relationship model enables arbitrarily complex statements to be made about plans, COA, orders, status, capabilities, etc.
This is a model provides the rich and generic ontology to capture, share, and use operational context.
The meta-data, which captures the relationships between data and information, is critical. It is not just the data but the relationships between data and information that provide situational awareness and understanding that supports decision making.

15. C4I Coalition Warfare Task
This work explored, demonstrated, and evaluated GH4 applicability to maritime coalition interoperability and system automation
GH4, via XML Schema, distributed operation context and tactical data
CORBA data server interface
Submarine combat control system
X3D browser-based visualization
Last year NUWC, NPS, and IDA performed work exploring operational context and demonstrating the use of GH4 in a maritime coalition context. This initial work provided evidence of the suitability of GH4 as a basis for interoperability and system automation.
GH4 was used to define an XML Schema which was then used to distributed operation context and tactical data.
Tactical track data passed from and to a submarine combat control system [CORBA data server interface]
Operations plans, in this case a Marine Corps Amphibious Raid, was represented in GH4 and then visualized by autogenerating a 3D scene using a XML technologies and a browser-based presentation.
The reuse of the GH4 ontology to auto-generate an schema for XML messaging itself a small transformation in the way we build information systems and services. Design once and use many times/place.

16. Auto-generation & Visualization of Structured Planning Information
ESG
CVN
Here are some scenes from this visualization.
Dr. Don Brutzman, MOVES, NPS

17. Multiple Transformation Enabler
New Capabilities for the Warfighter -
Applications, Intelligent Agents, and Autonomous Systems with Operational and Tactical Awareness
Cost Reduction
System Engineering
Maintenance
Interoperable based on top-down design
Operational Context Information Architecture
Industry Best Practices Approach
Start with Coalition Success
Trilogy is transformational in multiple ways:
Operationally and tactically aware applications will be proactive and more sophisticated enabling increased speed of command, decision aids with a wider scope of utility, all with reduced workload.
1xN design will simplify and speed the development and maintenance of interoperable systems.
All systems must start with a battlespace information modeling effort. Using the NATO GH capitalizes on 10 years of design work that has resulted in a superb rich ontology, that can be applied and not reinvented.
Interoperable based on the broadest set of requirements:
Read what you need to know, know that there is more if needed.
Industry best practices approach, i.e., XML requires users with common interests to agree to a common ontology.
Build next generation interoperability by leveraging a rich, and appropriate NATO standard, and standards process.

18. Future Opportunities Building on key ideas and successes
Sharing ideas, looking for synergy & partners:
Joint & Coalition Project formulation
Joint Experimentation
Scaling up and out
Appropriate to consider as a mission-oriented enterprise solution for all DoD
Working Coalition partnerships
Technology outreach to Allies
Where are the future opportunities?
We want to build on key idea and success, looking for partners.
Time is right to take the mature NATO design and technology and apply it at a critical scale to validate the transformational impact.
Joint Experimentation is key. Navy FBEs also rich environment for demonstration and evaluation.
These efforts imply DoD enterprise level opportunities
We need to leverage NATO experience.
Is there interest here?

19. POC: Mr. Erik Chaum Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Newport, RI