1 / 12

The Course of Action Challenge Problem (COA CP)

The COA Critique Generation Tool (COA CGT) automatically generates critiques of Courses of Action (COAs) for military operations based on problem descriptions provided. Smoothing the process of COA development and critique, COA CGT improves decision-making efficiency.

charlenej
Download Presentation

The Course of Action Challenge Problem (COA CP)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Course of Action Challenge Problem (COA CP)

  2. Basic Stuff • COA CP replaces the BS CP • SME’s author COA’s and the knowledge used to critique them • SHAKEN must acquire this knowledge from SME’s and automatically generate critiques of COA’s

  3. What’s a COA? • A COA describes a mission: • An objective • Units and equipment to be used • Actions to perform • Time constraints • Terrain characteristics

  4. The Author of a COA is Given a Problem Description • Sketched terrain map, indicating: • roadways, rivers, lakes, hills, forests • placements of blue units (good guys) and red units (bad guys) • Scenario narrative, including non-graphical information, such as • recent history, current dynamics, status of military units • Mission specification, including objectives and constraints • (e.g. Capture the hill by sunset, using at most 10% of resources)

  5. From this Problem Description, the SME authors one or more COA’s • Estimate of the situation, following METT-T/OCOKA, e.g. terrain analysis, such as lines of communication and avenues of approach • COA sketch – an overlay on the problem statement’s terrain sketch • Commander’s intent – a high level description of the goal and rationale. • Description of Main Attack, Supporting Attack, Fire Support, and Reserve: for each, a description of units, actions, and purpose • COA (initial) critique, along these dimensions: mission accomplishment, speed, simplicity, use of terrain, fire support, risk, and readiness for follow-up operations

  6. OCAKA • OCAKA: Principles for analyzing the terrain for Observation and fields of fire, Cover and concealment, Obstacles, Key terrain, and Avenues of approach. • For example: “Obstacles are any obstructions that stop, delay, or divert movement. Obstacles can be natural (rivers, swamps, cliffs, or mountains) or they may be artificial (barbed wire entanglements, pits, concrete or metal anti-mechanized traps). They can be ready-made or constructed in the field. Always consider any possible obstacles along your movement route and, if possible, try to keep obstacles between the enemy and yourself.”

  7. METT-T • Other dimensions for analysis, such as: Troops. “The size and type of the unit to be moved and its capabilities, physical condition, status of training, and types of equipment assigned all affect the selection of routes, positions, fire plans, and the various decisions to be made during movement. On ideal terrain such as relatively level ground with little or no woods, a platoon can defend a front of up to 400 meters. … Heavily wooded areas or very hilly areas may reduce the front a platoon can defend. The size of the unit must also be taken into consideration when planning a movement to contact. During movement, the unit must retain its ability to maneuver. A small draw or stream may reduce the unit's maneuverability but provide excellent concealment. All of these factors must be considered.”

  8. COA CP Process Overview • SMEi authors COA in Shaken. • Shaken produces critique Ci. • SMEj criticizes Ci and specifies knowledge Ki necessary to improve critique Ci. • SMEj enters knowledge Ki into Shaken. • Go to Step 2. • Notes: • -        SMEi produces a COA; SMEj critiques that COA. SMEs do not critique their own COAs. • -        The critique Ci is produced by Shaken. • -        This process is repeated for several iterations and we score the rate of acquisition of knowledge K i. It should decrease indicating that the critiquing knowledge is approaching a complete set. • -        Halfway through the summer evaluation, we should get new SMEs to guard against • overfitting of KR to COAs. We could also pursue cross validating results and randomizing.

  9. Notes: • SMEi authors COA Ci • SMEj adds/refines critiquing knowledge, Ki • SMEj does not refine the COA, Ci; that’s considered fixed • SMEi might author a set of COA, and part of critique Ci is • to compare, contrast, and score them

  10. Schedule

  11. An Example COA, from General Otstott http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/porter/Private/COA-CP-Example.doc

  12. A Preliminary Storyboard from Jihie http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/porter/Private/storyboard-from-jihie.ppt

More Related