CoAX – Coalition TIE Technology Integration Experiment November 2000 Briefing

1. DARPA CoAX – Coalition TIE Technology Integration Experiment November 2000 Briefing AFRL Rome, AIAI, Boeing, Dartmouth, DERA Malvern, Lockheed Martin ATL, Michigan, MIT Sloan, USC/ISI, UWF/IHMC Support from BBN, GITI, ISX, MITRE, Schafer, Stanford Coalition Agents eXperiment (CoAX) http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/coax/

2. Briefing Outline • Aims and Scenario • CoAX Components • Demonstrations • 9-Month Demonstration • Next Steps • Summary

3. CoAX Message • Operational Message • Interoperability of Systems • Agility and robustness • Coalition and “virtual” organizations • Technical Message • Agents as an appropriate paradigm to facilitate interoperability • Middleware of Grid for rapid configuration • Utility of domain management and task/process management services

4. Context • Increasing military requirements for coalition operations • Belief that agent computational model is a good fit to meet coalition interoperability requirements • US and UK Agent Research Programmes • US DARPA Control of Agent Based Systems (CoABS) • UK DERA Agents Project • Need for “middleware” such as is provided by CoABS Grid Infrastructure

5. Aim of Coalition TIE • Aim is to address unique aspects of coalition operations through the development and evaluation of agent domain and task management services • Aim will be met through delivery of: • Phased technical demonstrations of increasing complexity • Development of generic Coalition-oriented grid services • Requirements: • Use of a wide variety of different agent systems • Use of existing military (non-agent) applications

6. Key Coalition Drivers • Different cultures, doctrines, and languages: • Different doctrine, decision making, rules of engagement and, in general, mission “agendas” • Command authorities - agreement and transfers • Different interpretation of situational information • Incompatibility of respective national information systems: • Different technology skill and equipment levels • Lack of information systems resource sharing agreements • Variable reliability of components and infrastructures • Lack of compatible security architectures • Need for rapid configuration and reconfiguration by personnel with limited training • Limited models for coalition force operations Derived from LeRoy Pearce (Canadian MOD), 1999

7. Key Technical Drivers • Cannot assume interoperability, reliability or availability of different nations systems • Need for partial (secure) sharing and visualization of processes, data and facilities • Need to work with agents in multiple dynamically determined domains • Need for flexible inter-agent task and process management • Need for rapid formation, management and change of agent relationships

8. Binni - Gateway to theGolden Bowl of Africa Rathmell, R.A. (1999) A Coalition Force Scenario 'Binni - Gateway to the Golden Bowl of Africa', in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Knowledge-Based Planning for Coalition Forces, (ed. Tate, A.) pp. 115-125, Edinburgh, Scotland, 10th-11th May 1999.

9. Binni - All Features KEY Tarmac roads Heights (metres) Railways To Cecil × Population centres Military airfields Gravel roads N 37E Q Q Ports Ports Civilian Airfields Civilian Airfields Tracks Tracks 21N To Segumbo Cape Amstado To Pample Kaso Lagoon 34E 35E 36E 33E GAO To Tifillo W E 175 876 613 527 175 613 123 788 752 588 268 775 482 390 436 707 542 20N To Cunmege 32E Akwapim-Gao Range Q CACA REGION 38E Jacal S Caca 31E LAKE CACA 19N Q Q Q × Daka Gambaga Escarpment CACA REGION EASTERN REGION 18N BANDAR REGION SIKASSO COSTA DEL MARIA LAKI UGWULU BANDAR BANDAR Gambaga Gamba Kwanabouri Brongo Brongo Aida Epidurango Nedalla Langford Slafito Libretto Zingato Lissa Kingtown Sellerham Asoba Wampimba Sago- town Biloo Belucar Higgville Libar Zatu Salisbury Dinga Anala St Andrews Wazilla Masembi Bisa Kamongo Jinja Brongo Laval Sagiba Bisha Antok Dado Slabo Donga Kutchi Akimbo Laponga Elmina Jamestown Suthertown Esuko Nanga Grandville Kaso Minga Hakkali Caca Dam Polia Anguiba Gonobo Kolla Sonara Zaribe Grandvache Tonka Saltpond Achobo Adaido Bonrope Bave Wonka Deanville Diplombo Sandosta Blackman Komenda Atewa Ranga Mawli Kwahu Plateau 19N × 39E 17N NORTHERN REGION Q Amisa ASHANTI REGION White Caca Afram 18N CENTRAL REGION × 16N Pra Q × Ofin Kapowa AGADEZ 17N UPPER REGION Cape Vincent Ankobra × 15N WESTERN REGION Tana 16N Black Caca 36E 37E 38E 39E 31E 32E 33E 34E 35E To Falo AGADEZ To Harra To Petit Paris 15N To Escallope LAYERS: Setting Geography Transport Water Names Lat / Long Return

10. Forces separated by firestorm N Cape Amstado Kaso Lagoon W E Jacal S Caca LAKE CACA Daka Gao forces Mawli Amisa White Caca Afram Pra Ofin Agadez forces Kapowa Cape Vincent Ankobra Tana Firestorm Black Caca

11. N Cape Amstado Kaso Lagoon W E Jacal S Caca LAKE CACA Daka Mawli Amisa White Caca Afram Pra Ofin Kapowa Cape Vincent Ankobra Tana Black Caca Gao deception is intended to displace firestorm: separation fails. Gao forces False Gao forces Agadez forces Firestorm False Agadez forces

12. Briefing Outline • Aims and Scenario • CoAX Components • Demonstrations • TTCP Demonstration • Next Steps • Summary

13. Agents on the Grid AODB Agent (LM ATL) Observer Agents (Dartmouth) Malicious Agents (IHMC, Boeing) Web Weather Agent (USC/ISI) … DARPA CoABS Grid (GITI, ISX) Military Systems CAMPS (AFRL,GITI, BBN) MBP (DERA) … Agent Grid Services Task and Process Management (AIAI) Domain Management Services (Boeing, IHMC) Plan Deconfliction (Michigan) Exception Handling (MIT) Incentive Management (Stanford) CoAX Components Agent Frameworks KAoS Agents (Boeing, IHMC) D’Agents (Dartmouth) EMAA/CAST Agents (LM ATL)

14. Briefing Outline • Aims and Scenario • CoAX Components • Demonstrations • 9-Month Demonstration • Next Steps • Summary

15. Demonstration Schedule • 1-month demo at kick-off in February 2000 showing direct connection between DERA MBP and LM-ATL AODB • 6-month integration milestone in July 2000 showing initial integration of selected CoAX components for 9-month demo • 9-month demo in October 2000: • Brief the CoAX TIE and Binni scenario • Show full integration of selected CoAX components • Show that selected components interoperate in a Binni-based scenario • Tell a relevant 'story‘ about agents for information gathering • Additional stand-alone demos of other components • 18-month demo in July 2001 showing full integration of all CoAX components in a rich coalition scenario: • Expanding scope to cover planning and execution • 30-month demo in July 2002 showing dynamic aspects of domain management and tasking

16. Master Battle Planner v2.1 (DERA, UK) EMAA / CAST Agents (LM ATL, US) AODB CoABS Grid Month 1 - Initial Demo • Demonstration involves AFRL Rome, DERA Malvern and LM ATL and is a first (risk reduction) step toward CoAX • Demo shows legacy applications can be usefully integrated into an agent framework

17. 6-Month (July 2000) Milestone Report • Eleven agents in three separate agent domains representing coalition functional units (JTF HQ, JFAC HQ, Gao Intel) • Binni scenario information used to drive storyboard • Tasking and control across coalition functional units • Visualization of coalition C2 process via a simple process model • Simple policy administration tool for selective information sharing and communication blocking

18. Gao Intel Dbii DM2 Intel2 MM2 Dbi JFAC HQ JTF HQ PP' Intel1 MBP MM3 DM3 MM1 DM1 Domain-aware conversational grid agents LM-ATL Non-domain-aware message-based grid agents AODB 6-Month (July 2000)Milestone Structure

19. 9-Month (October 2000) Demonstration Report • Focus on information-gathering phase • First interoperation of agent-wrapped legacy US and UK systems • New agents and domains • Three additional agent domains (6 domains and ~25 agents) • Incorporation of domain-aware CAMPS airlift planning system • Ariadne agent providing publicly available weather information • More powerful Process Panel • New domain management functionality • Malicious observer agent thwarted by domain management and NOMADS resource control mechanisms • KAoS Policy Administration Tool (KPAT) administering communication, registration, and resource policies • New stand-alone demonstrations: • MIT exception handling • Stanford incentive management • U. Michigan plan deconfliction • Dartmouth ‘observer agents’

20. Gao Intel Dbii DM2 Intel2 MM2 Dbi JTF HQ JFAC HQ PP' US MM3 MBP DM3 Intel1 DM4 MM4 AL Plan Weather Viz Observers (Intel) AODB MM1 MM5 DM1 DGO DM5 DAO Gao Obs. LM-ATL CAMPS Ariadne GAO MM6 DM6 AODB Weather ALDB Sub-domain of “Observers” 9-Month (October 2000) Demonstration Structure

21. Briefing Outline • Aims and Scenario • CoAX Components • Demonstration • 9-Month Demonstration • Next Steps • Summary

22. CoAX

23. Briefing Outline • Aims and Scenario • CoAX Components • Demonstrations • 9-Month Demonstration • Next Steps • Summary

24. 18-Month (July 2001) Demonstration Plan • More realism in coalition structures • All CoAX members integrated (9 domains and ~35 agents) • Coalition agents playing multiple roles in different domains • New policies add additional robustness and security • Added functionality in process and task management • Increased scope of Binni scenario demonstration • Richer information gathering phase • Extend scope to execution phases with agent systems responding dynamically to events • Incorporating coalition functionality becomes easier • Packaging capabilities as pluggable grid services

25. Dbiii UK Observers (Intel) Shared Intel3 MM7 MM5 DGO Intel1a DM5 DM7 DAO Gao Obs. MM8 DM8 Dbi GAO MM6 DM6 JFAC HQ US MBP MM2 DM4 DM1 MM4 MM1 AL Plan Intel2 DM2 AODB Gao Intel Plan Dec. Dbii Intel1 MM3 Met. PP MM9 CAMPS LM-ATL IM DM3 Weather Viz Coalition DM9 AODB ALDB EH Weather Ariadne 18-Month (July 2001) Demo Structure

26. 30-Month (July 2002) Demonstration Plan • Dynamic “come as you are” coalition formation • Dynamic creation of ‘virtual coalition organisation’ • Agents and domains added to coalition structure ‘on-the-fly’ • Dynamic coalition tasks and processes • Tailored visualizations • High-level tools usable without specialized training • Generic task, process, and domain management tools

27. Briefing Outline • Aims and Scenario • CoAX Components • Demonstrations • 9-Month Demonstration • Next Steps • Summary

28. Status andNext Steps • 1-month and 6-month demo milestones successfully completed • Preview of progress on 9-month demonstration at Malvern TTCP meeting • 100+ page ‘living document’ describing CoAX contributions and Binni ‘FLASH’ scenario delivered • Ongoing work with GITI on design for packaging of agent domain and process management services for the grid • 9-month demonstration ready in October 2000 • Integrated demonstration • Stand-alone demonstrations • Links to Joint Battlespace Infosphere, Joint Battlespace Digitisation

29. Summary • Coalition operations is a matter of high concern for the military and a great proving ground for agent research • Binni provides mature rich source of realistic scenario data • Actual military tools used in true cross-national collaboration—hope to expand to additional nations in the future • Sixteen partners cooperating in phased technical integration demonstrators • CoABS Grid provided necessary interoperability • Significant new research issues being addressed of both theoretical and practical significance

30. Further Information and Involvement • CoAX and Binni documentation available • See http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/coax/ • We encourage your participation… • In addressing key coalition and technical drivers • In seeking operational opportunities • In future demonstrations

31. The End