Skip to main content

Uncertainty Management in Battle-Planning Software

  • Chapter
Knowledge-Based Simulation

Part of the book series: Advances in Simulation ((ADVS.SIMULATION,volume 4))

Abstract

Many types of uncertainty can arise in computer simulation modules which model command and control for battle planning This chapter treats the issue of computer simulated planning for battle planning experiments. Computer simulation of attrition, movement, and logistics are not included. Techniques for computer simulated battle-planning are reviewed. Implications of resolving conflicting planning methodologies and their effects on program design are discussed. It is the authors thesis that the model logic of current combat simulation models lacks the capability for reasoning ahead of its current state (i.e. look-aheads). This provides future combat simulation models a tremendous opportunity for “smart” command and control (C2) logic to reflect the knowledge of the commander rather than the “geometry” of the battlefield. Since perfect knowledge of battle-planning may not be attainable an effective trade-off is to adapt a less extreme position in which foresight is introduced into the models. These notions require a fundamental restructuring of combat simulations driven entirely by physical entities in order to economically address the different types of questions which arise in C2 planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abelson, H. & Sussman, G.L. (1986). Structure and interpretation of computer programs Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, H. (1988). HITECH report: HITECH becomes first computer senior master, AI magazine, 9 (3), 85–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, G.D., & Shubik, M. (1979). The war game: a critique of military problem solving Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilega, J.A., & Grange, J.K. (1984). The military applications of modelingWright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Air Force Institute of Technology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clausewitz, C. (1976). On war In M. Howard & P. Paret (Ed. and Trans.), Carl von Clausewitz on war Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charniak, E. & McDermott, D. (1986). Introduction to artificial intelligenceReading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, T., & Boddy, M. (1988). An analysis of time-dependent planning. Proceedings of the seventh national conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 49–543). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockery, J.T., & van den Driessche, J. (1984). Use of artificial intelligence and Psychology in the analysis of command and control. (Technical Memorandum STC). The Hague, Holland: Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), Technical Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockery, J.T., & Santoro, R.T. (1988). Lanchester revisited: progress in modeling C2 in combat. Signal magazine, 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupuy, T.N. (1979). Numbers, predications and war: using history to evaluate combat factors and predict the outcome of battles New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genesereth, M.R., & Nilsson, N.J. (1987). Logical foundations of artificial intelligence Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Corporation (1985). Interactive theater wargame FORCEM Gaming Evaluator (FORGE): program specification. (Contract MDA 903–84-C-0509 Phase I Report). Melbourne, FL: Harris Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, B.C. (1988). Operational art: the importance of the operational level of war. Bulletin of Military Operations Research: Phalanx, 21 (3), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, W.P. (1984). Military modeling Alexandria, VA: Military Operations Research Society, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanov, D.A., Savelyev, V.P., Shemanskiy, P.V. (1977). Fundamentals of tactical command and control: a soviet view (translated). Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P., Gallagher, K., & Corkill, D. (1987). GBB reference manual and GBB source code COINS Technical Report 87–120). Amherst, MA: Computer and Information Sciences Department, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koff, C.N., Flann, N.S., & Dietterich, T.G. (1988). An efficient ATMS (automated truth maintenance system) for equivalence relations. Proceedings of the seventh national conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 182–187). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. (1988). Proceeding of the DARPA workshop on case-based reasoning Palo Alto, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metzger, J.J., Bates, C.B., Womack, F.E. (1986). Command and Control (C2) enhancements for FORCEM (CAA Study Report CAA-SR-86–5). Bethesda, MD: United States Army Concepts Analysis Agency (NTIS/DTIC Number ADF86077).

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuie, R. (1987). What good is a man in the loop? Bulletin of Military Operations Research, 20, (2), 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modjeski, R. (1987). Artificial intelligence study (AIS) (CAA Research Product CAA-RP-87–1). Bethesda, MD: United States Army Concept Analysis Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nii, P. (1986). Blackboard systems: the blackboard model of problem solving and the evolution of blackboard architectures, AI Magazine, 7 (2), 38–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nii, P. (1986). Blackboard systems: blackboard applications systems, blackboard systems from a knowledge engineering perspective, AI Magazine 7 (2), 82–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shank, R. & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shephard, R.W., Hartley, D.A., Haysman, P.J., Thorpe, L., & Bathe, M.R. (1988). Applied operations research: examples from defense assessment New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, R.G. (1988). A theory of debugging plans and interpretations. Proceedings of the seventh national conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 94–99). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweet, R., Metersky, M., Sovereign, M. (1985). Proceedings of the Military Operations Research Society Command and Control Evaluations Workshop Monterey, CA: Navel Postgraduate School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J.G. (1980). Force-on-Force attrition modeling Arlington, VA: Military Operations Research Society of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J.G. (1983a). Lanchester models of warfare (Vol. 1). Arlington, VA: Military Operations Research Society of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J.G. (1983b). Lanchester models of warfare (Vol. 2). Arlington, VA: Military Operations Research Society of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Army Command and General Staff College (1988). The command estimate (Student Test ST 100–9). Fort Leavenworth, KS: United States Command and General Staff College.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Army (1986). Operations (Field Manual 100–5). Fort Monroe, VA: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Mellinthin, Stolfi, & Sobick (1984) NATO under attack Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, R. (1983). Planning and understanding Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. Wise, B.P. (1988a). Simulation experiments in command and control Unpub-lished manuscript, McDonnell Douglas Research Laboratories, Saint Louis, MO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, B.P. (1988b). Experimentally comparing uncertain inference systems to probability. In J.F. Lemmer, & L.N. Kanal (Eds.) Uncertainty in artificial intelligence New York: Elsevier Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, B.P. (1986). An experimental comparison of uncertain inference systems Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie-Mellon University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, B.P., & Modjeski, R.B. (1987). Thinking about AI and OR: uncertainty management, Bulletin of military operations research, 20 (4), 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wise, B.P., Modjeski, R.B. (1991). Uncertainty Management in Battle-Planning Software. In: Fishwick, P.A., Modjeski, R.B. (eds) Knowledge-Based Simulation. Advances in Simulation, vol 4. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3040-3_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3040-3_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-97374-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-3040-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics