Interchanging Agents and Humans in Military Simulation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
From: IAAI-01 Proceedings. Copyright © 2001, AAAI (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. Interchanging Agents and Humans in Military Simulation Clinton Heinze1, Simon Goss1, Torgny Josefsson1, Kerry Bennett1, Sam Waugh1, Ian Lloyd1, Graeme Murray1 & John Oldfield2 1 Defence, Science, and Technology Organisation 2 Royal Australian Air Force 506 Lorimer Street, Fishermen’s Bend, Evaluation Analysis & Standards Flight, 92 Wing, Victoria, Australia RAAF Base Edinburgh, South Australia, Australia [email protected] [email protected] Abstract and human until implementation [14]. With this as a driver The innovative reapplication of a multi-agent system for in the design process the construction of systems in which human-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation was a consequence of humans and agents can be interchanged is simplified. Two appropriate agent oriented design. The use of intelligent systems using the same base architecture are used to support agents for simulating human decision making offers the operations research: potential for analysis and design methodologies that do not • The original system that utilises intelligent agents for distinguish between agent and human until modelling all of the military personnel within a implementation. With this as a driver in the design process scenario. This is conceptually identical with the the construction of systems in which humans and agents systems reported by Tidhar et. al. [1] although applied can be interchanged is simplified. Two systems have been to different aircraft and missions. constructed and deployed to provide defence analysts with • the tools required to advise and assist the Australian The new system that removes the intelligent agent for a Defence Force in the conduct of maritime surveillance and particular aircraft of interest and provides user patrol. The systems both simulate maritime air operations. interfaces that allow the actual crew of that aircraft to One utilises intelligent agents to provide models of tactical fly simulated missions for the purpose of validating and 2 decision making, the other provides the same environment developing tactics. but provides a set of user interfaces to allow air force flight The use of intelligent agents to military simulation is crews to participate in human in the loop simulation by maturing. For several years intelligent agents have been replacing the intelligent agents. The experiences gained applied to constructive military simulation. Architectures, from this process indicate that it is simpler, both in design methodologies and programming patterns in support of this and implementation, to add humans to a system designed development are improving. for intelligent agents than it is to add intelligent agents to a system designed for humans. The incorporation of intelligent agents into HIL simulation is generally post-hoc engineering of large legacy systems or the injection of entities into a large distributed simulation Introduction via an interface [10]. Agents have requirements on systems The modification and development of existing that are not apparent in mainstream HIL simulations. constructive1, multi-agent military systems by the Difficulties associated with the successful incorporation of Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation intelligent agents into extant systems are often associated (DSTO) to provide the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) with a failure to recognise the specific requirements that with human-in-the-loop (HIL) capability is reported in this agents will place on the system [9,16]. These problems can paper. It extends applications developed and described be alleviated by careful design of new systems or by costly earlier [1,2], and commences the process of integrating remediation of existing systems. intelligent agent developments [8] with HIL systems This paper provides a case study of a deployed HIL research [3]. The applications described here differ in simulation used for development of tactical procedures for a purpose from most other deployed HIL simulations in that maritime surveillance aircraft. An existing constructive they are used for exploration, evaluation and development simulation that used intelligent agents to model all human of tactics and procedures rather than for training [15]. components was modified. The modifications provide user The innovative use of an existing multi-agent system for interfaces that allow air force personnel to replace the HIL simulation was a consequence of appropriate agent agents that previously modelled them. The experiences oriented design. The use of intelligent agents for simulating gained from this process indicate that it is simpler, both in human decision making offers the potential for analysis and design methodologies that do not distinguish between agent 2 There is a phase of significant duration in an acquisition or mid-life refit programme where military units are in a work-up mode in anticipation of 1 delivery of platforms with enhanced capability that makes them effectively The simulation community uses the term constructive to designate those ‘first of kind’ and requires development of new or significantly altered systems that contain no human interaction. tactics, operating procedures, and doctrine. design and implementation, to add humans to a system • The tactical decision making processes on board the designed for intelligent agents than it is to add intelligent aircraft representing the human operators, and crew agents to a system designed for humans. workload (including the type and amount of information available at any given time), the sensor data-fusion The following section details the domain of application of process and chain of command. this technology, that of maritime patrol and surveillance by the RAAF. Operational analysis that incorporates both • The environment, including weather and sea state. constructive and HIL simulation can offer significant • Several types of ships. savings to the Air Force. Savings are realised both in mission performance and in support costs with respect to An example mission with some of the factors that need to be fuel used and time to complete a mission. By far the biggest considered in tactical decision making is outlined below: savings are realised in extending the life of type of an aircraft through smarter operation. Typical AP-3C Scenario Maritime Patrol and Surveillance Tactics An AP-3C Maritime Patrol Aircraft is tasked to find and monitor the movements of a target whose location is not precisely known. In this Air Operations Division (AOD) of the DSTO supports the situation the aircraft will fly a predefined search pattern over the region of RAAF’s Maritime Patrol Group (MPG) in developing new ocean that the target is suspected of being located within. The aircraft will tactics and ‘concepts of operation’ for the upgraded AP-3C use its various sensors such as the radar, the ESM (Electronic Support Orion Maritime Patrol Aircraft (see Fig. 1). The Orions are Measures: for detecting the radar transmissions of other ships and used by the RAAF in peacetime for maritime search, aircraft) and infra-red optical sensors to try and locate and classify all surveillance and operations in and around Australian possible ships in the region in order to find the target. The radar operator territorial waters. and the ESM operator perform their duties trying to detect and classify various ‘contacts’ on their sensors. Typically these two operators have TACCO, NAVCOM, Radio Operator, Radar and ESM hundreds of ‘contacts’ on their sensors at any given time. The protocol for Operators (Intelligent Agents) using the radar and ESM sensors (they have many different modes) depends on a number of factors such as weather conditions, altitude, target type, the presence or otherwise of other ships and aircraft and whether the aircraft wants to advertise its position to the target it is looking for. Contacts that cannot be eliminated at this stage are passed up to the Sensor Employment Manager (SEM) who performs data-fusion duties, such as P-3C Platform & associating data from the two sensors if they are deemed to be from the Aerodynamics same source, and who directs the use of different sensor classification EL/M2022 Radar techniques. The SEM passes on information about contacts that may ALR 2001 ESM possibly be the target to the Tactical Coordinator (TACCO). The TACCO Electro-Optical & decides which contacts need further investigation and in which order, Infra Red Sensors either by flying closer or changing aspect for different sensor classification techniques. The TACCO must balance many competing factors, including minimising the amount of unnecessary flying distance in order to complete Figure 1. The various sensors and human operators that are modelled in this work superimposed on a photograph of an AP-3C the mission as soon as possible (in effect solving ‘travelling-salesman’ type Orion maritime patrol aircraft. problems) and not concentrating on identifying one suspicious contact at the expense of others. The Orions are in an extensive upgrade program that includes new sensors and avionics that significantly The TACCO and SEM are always on the alert for ‘suspicious’ behaviour improve the capability of the aircraft. Because MPG have that may single out one unknown contact as the target. In effect no previous operational experience with some of these new ‘suspicious’ behaviour means a reaction or response from the contact that sensors, AOD’s operational analysts work