Mikel D. Petty

Data distribution management migration from DoD 1.3 to IEEE 1516

Abstract: In September 2000, the IEEE approved the three High Level Architecture (HLA) documents as standards, 1516, 1516.1, and 1516.2. The form, functionality, and content of these documents are significantly the same as their DoD sources, the HLA 1.3 standards. Unlike the other service areas, Data Distribution Management (DDM) experienced noticeable changes in response to input from the community and a focused re-engineering effort. These changes included the removal or routing spaces and the introduction of default ranges. While these changes did not affect the fundamental functionality of DDM, they simplified implementation of some approaches for users. With little effort, users can design DDM approaches which will migrate smoothly from DoD 1.3 to IEEE 1516.

Computer-generated forces in distributed interactive simulation

Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) is an architecture for building large-scale simulation models from a set of independent simulator nodes communicating via a common network protocol. DIS is most often used to create a simulated battlefield for military training. Computer Generated Forces (CGF) systems control large numbers of autonomous battlefield entities in a DIS simulation using computer equipment and software rather than humans in simulators. CGF entities serve as both enemy forces and supplemental friendly forces in a DIS exercise. Research into various aspects of CGF systems is ongoing. Several CGF systems have been implemented.

Usefulness of Software Architecture Description Languages for Modeling and Analysis of Federates and Federation Architectures

Software architecture is high-level software design dealing with the structure and organization of large software systems. Architecture description languages (ADLs) are languages designed to represent software designs at the architecture level. ADLs are not widely used in the development of simulation systems. This research investigates the utility and effectiveness of ADLs for architecture-level design and analysis of simulation systems. Experimental applications of two ADLs to the specification and analysis of simulation architectures were conducted. Rapide was used to model the EnviroFed federation architecture and analyze data volume with and without interest management. Acme was used to model the ModSAF federate architecture and to analyze execution time at the component and federate levels in ModSAF. The experiments showed that ADLs could be used to discover important features of simulation system architectures.

Software frameworks for model composition

A software framework is an architecture or infrastructure intended to enable the integration and interoperation of software components. Specialized types of software frameworks are those specifically intended to support the composition of models or other components within a simulation system. Such frameworks are intended to simplify the process of assembling a complex model or simulation system from simpler component models as well as to promote the reuse of the component models. Several different types of software frameworks for model composition have been designed and implemented; those types include common library, product line architecture, interoperability protocol, object model, formal, and integrative environment. The various framework types have different components, processes for composing models, and intended applications. In this survey the fundamental terms and concepts of software frameworks for model composition are presented, the different types of such frameworks are explained and compared, and important examples of each type are described.

Tactical simulation in an object-oriented animated graphics environment

Action Graphics (AG) combines the ideas of animated graphics, free-form spreadsheets and object-oriented programming to produce a problem solving and simulation environment.

Improving Air Combat Maneuvering Skills Through Self-Study and Simulation-Based Practice

Background. Although instructor participation is generally thought to improve the effectiveness of simulation-based training, trainees may have time and opportunity to practice skills in simulation when an instructor is not available. Aim. The question of whether complex psychomotor skills, such as air combat maneuvering, can be acquired and improved entirely without instructor assistance through self-study and simulation-based practice is investigated. Method. The results of an extended sequence of simulated air combat missions flown by a single experimental subject are reported and analyzed. Over a period of eight calendar years the subject flew 2,950 simulated air combat missions organized into 138 campaigns using seven different aircraft types. Throughout the period the subject studied air combat maneuvering in a self-guided, self-study mode and consciously used maneuvers and tactics learned during that study with the intent of improving his performance. However, determining whether the subject’s skills were actually improving over time was confounded by the fact that between some campaigns the subject changed the aircraft type he was flying as well as the aircraft types flown by the opposition, making direct campaign-to-campaign performance comparisons problematic. Consequently, a type-independent measure of performance was developed to normalize for the different aircraft types and allow direct comparison of performance across different aircraft types flown and opposed. Results. Two different nonparametric statistical tests were applied to the normalized performance measure across all campaigns. A third nonparametric statistical method was applied to victories within each aircraft type. All three showed statistically significant improvement in the subject’s skills over time despite the complete absence of instructor assistance. Conclusions. Although this case study must be considered anecdotal because it involves only a single experimental subject, it does provide an existence proof that self-guided self-study and simulation-based practice without an instructor can produce improvement in complex psychomotor skills in some learners. In addition, the analytical methods used to normalize for different aircraft types and test for improvement may be useful in similar situations where performance must be compared across time-varying circumstances.

Organizational Simulation for Model Based Systems Engineering

Abstract Organizations creating complex systems often have hierarchical team networks; this structure affects system performance because some teams have greater influence over dimensions of parts produced by other teams. Dimensional interdependencies among components produce ripple-effects; examples include load paths and thermal flows. Simulating such phenomena requires finite element and computational fluid dynamics models. Characteristics, like weight, cost, and reliability can be calculated for parts and summed to accumulate or roll-up the values at subsystem and system levels. This paper describes multi-agent models and simulations of an organization developing a complex system. One model determined that NetLogo can generate a hierarchical model of thousands of highly interconnected teams. A second model accumulates weights and reliabilities of components with some accretion at each level of integration and generates a system level weight and reliability. A simulation generates part dimensions based on team interaction. A second simulation uses a finite element model to demonstrate temperature gradients of parts and agents moving through the structure to transfer heat among the parts. Simulating physical characteristics in an organizational simulation enables an analyst to demonstrate how different organizational structures affect the system performance. NetLogo proved to be a powerful development environment for organizational and system simulations.

Educating the workforce: M&S professional education

As Modeling & Simulation (M&S) becomes increasingly important, there is a significant and growing need to educate and train M&S practitioners and researchers. The Department of Defense (DoD) has a growing need for an educated M&S workforce. This need includes users, developers, managers and executive-level personnel, which can effectively apply M&S to DoD requirements. While several universities offer academic M&S degree programs, the time and expense of earning these degrees often limit the number of people that go through these programs. Professional education is an alternative for gaining M&S skills and knowledge, and courses are offered by a range of university and commercial groups. The observations in this paper begin to outline both the need and available options for M&S professional education. This collection of position papers begins a conversation on the DoDs need for professional M&S education and how the M&S Body of Knowledge might fit within that strategy. These position papers are contributed in preparation of a panel discussion and edited for the supporting proceedings.

Plowshares: An Emergency Management Training Simulation

The Plowshares project is applying military constructive simulation technology to training for emergency management. The U. S. Armys Janus combat simulation model was enhanced to support emergency management scenarios that include hurricanes, fires, and chemical spills. The enhanced Janus software, known as TERRA, has been used in a county Emergency Operations Center to provide the stimulus for training events structured as command post exercises. The first phase of the project culminated in a demon stration exercise using the TERRA system at the Orange County Florida Emergency Operations Center. In that demonstration Emergency Operations Center and response agency personnel responded to a hurricane and its subsequent tornadoes, fires, and rubble. This paper describes the overall Plowshares project, the hurricane, tornado, and fire models used in TERRA, and the methods for using TERRA to train emergency managers.

Recognizing the contributions of reviewers in publishing and peer review

For authors, publishing in high-quality peer-reviewed journals is critical for gaining recognition from their peers. Frequently it is also mandatory as part of the ‘‘publish or perish’’ environment of academia and other research organizations. In addition to gaining recognition via publishing, access to peer-reviewed journals is one way researchers and practitioners can remain abreast of the latest work in their field, get inspired by exposure to new ideas, and gain detailed knowledge about the cutting-edge work of others, all of which are requirements for professional and intellectual growth. For a research discipline, having high-quality, peer-reviewed, recognizable and reputable journals is critical for fostering a sense of community and providing a central focus that allows researchers to identify as part of a group. SIMULATION is the monthly journal of the Society for Modeling and Simulation International (SCS). It focuses on both methodologies and applications of modeling and simulation (M&S). Together with the Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation (JDMS), which covers military and defense applications of M&S, these journals are focal points for the communication and dissemination of highquality research related to the theory and practice of M&S. The success and growth of these journals enables and is enabled by the success and growth of SCS and the M&S community. As part of our continuing efforts to enhance the quality of these journals, we carefully reviewed factors affecting their growth and quality improvement. This involved discussions with SCS members as well as with authors who have submitted manuscripts to SIMULATION and JDMS. What we heard consistently is that timely handling of manuscripts is very important for authors and is something that affects their willingness to submit their manuscripts to the journal. Another known factor that contributes to the vibrancy of the journals is the number of manuscript submissions; this number can be interpreted as a proxy for quality because it affects the ability to select high-quality papers for publication. Thus, we decided to focus on improving the timeliness of handling manuscripts and on motivating authors to submit their work to SCS journals. Understanding the logistics of publishing a journal such as SIMULATION is important in identifying opportunities for optimizing timeliness. A critical factor, perhaps the most critical factor, affecting the overall paper-handling process following the submission of a manuscript is that the editing process largely depends on volunteer editors and reviewers. Every submission is initially reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, who makes an initial determination of whether the submission is within the journal’s scope. If it is, the submitted manuscript is assigned to one of the journal’s associate editors who is knowledgeable in the manuscript’s subject area. The associate editor is responsible for identifying and inviting reviewers who in turn referee the manuscript and very often make recommendations for revisions that will improve it. These recommendations are aggregated by the associate editor, who makes a recommendation regarding the paper to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision. Everyone involved in the process as described (Editorin-Chief, associate editors, and reviewers) are unpaid volunteers. Moreover, they are in their roles because they are experts, and as such, there are many competing demands on their time. Therefore, the challenge in maintaining the timeliness of the review process is that it involves a lot of work with varying amounts of benefit for the involved volunteers. In particular, reviewers are expected to do a lot of work with relatively little credit and/or motivation. As anyone who has reviewed a scientific paper knows, performing a thorough review of a manuscript can take several hours. Unlike editors, who are recognized by name on an ongoing basis, reviewers go largely unnoticed except once every year when the journal publishes a list of names thanking the reviewers who have contributed to the journal during the previous year. This is simply not enough recognition of the essential work of the reviewers. Furthermore, when crediting reviewers, there is no differentiation between a reviewer who consistently does thorough reviews with constructive comments and a reviewer who simply makes a recommendation and provides no additional supporting materials. Beginning this month, we have instituted two new initiatives intended to acknowledge the work of reviewers, as well as to motivate authors.