Share Email Print

Proceedings Paper

Warfighter decision making performance analysis as an investment priority driver
Author(s): David J. Thornley; David F. Dean; James C. Kirk
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

Estimating the relative value of alternative tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) and information systems requires measures of the costs and benefits of each, and methods for combining and comparing those measures. The NATO Code of Best Practice for Command and Control Assessment explains that decision making quality would ideally be best assessed on outcomes. Lessons learned in practice can be assessed statistically to support this, but experimentation with alternate measures in live conflict is undesirable. To this end, the development of practical experimentation to parameterize effective constructive simulation and analytic modelling for system utility prediction is desirable. The Land Battlespace Systems Department of Dstl has modeled human development of situational awareness to support constructive simulation by empirically discovering how evidence is weighed according to circumstance, personality, training and briefing. The human decision maker (DM) provides the backbone of the information processing activity associated with military engagements because of inherent uncertainty associated with combat operations. To develop methods for representing the process in order to assess equipment and non-technological interventions such as training and TTPs we are developing componentized or modularized timed analytic stochastic model components and instruments as part of a framework to support quantitative assessment of intelligence production and consumption methods in a human decision maker-centric mission space. In this paper, we formulate an abstraction of the human intelligence fusion process from the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory's (Dstl's) INCIDER model to include in our framework, and synthesize relevant cost and benefit characteristics.

Paper Details

Date Published: 30 April 2010
PDF: 12 pages
Proc. SPIE 7705, Modeling and Simulation for Defense Systems and Applications V, 77050L (30 April 2010); doi: 10.1117/12.849927
Show Author Affiliations
David J. Thornley, Imperial College London (United Kingdom)
David F. Dean, Defence Science and Technology Lab. (United Kingdom)
James C. Kirk, Honeywell Technology (United States)

Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 7705:
Modeling and Simulation for Defense Systems and Applications V
Eric J. Kelmelis, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top