1 / 22

Quantitative Capability Delivery Increments (QCDI): Modeling the Demand for Future Net Centric Capability Overview for

Quantitative Capability Delivery Increments (QCDI): Modeling the Demand for Future Net Centric Capability Overview for FACT. May 12, 2010 Craig Burris, JHU APL David Signori, EBR Jimmie McEver, EBR. Outline. QCDI Need QCDI Demand Model Measurement Framework Estimates of User Needs

laddie
Download Presentation

Quantitative Capability Delivery Increments (QCDI): Modeling the Demand for Future Net Centric Capability Overview for

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. Quantitative Capability Delivery Increments (QCDI): Modeling the Demand for Future Net Centric CapabilityOverview for FACT May 12, 2010 Craig Burris, JHU APL David Signori, EBR Jimmie McEver, EBR

  2. Outline • QCDI Need • QCDI Demand Model • Measurement Framework • Estimates of User Needs • Aggregation Scheme • Exploring Demand • QCDI Supply Model • Application of the Model: Assessing Supply vs. Demand • Status and Way-ahead

  3. Background: The Need for the QCDI • NC CPM tasked to develop a capability delivery plan that sets specific delivery points, describes warfighter capability improvements, and highlights the “to be” architecture at each of those delivery points(1) • The NC CDI (approved 22 Jun 09) describes the warfighters’ needed capabilities at each delivery point • The CDI must be quantified so that specific warfighter needs (demand) can be compared against performance parameters of programs (supply) • The Quantitative Capability Delivery Increments (QCDI) meets this need by providing a full-range of technical metrics and values derived from the CDI • QCDI, Architecture, and other CPM tools used collectively to achieve DEPSECDEF guidance QCDI Provides a Mechanism to Measure Progress Toward Vision of the CDI [1] Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum, September 14, 2006, Subject: Capability Portfolio Management Test Case Roles, Responsibilities, Authorities and Approaches. Memo superseded by DoDD 7045.20, September 25, 2008, However task to ”Evaluate capability demand (both warfighting and non-warfighting) against resource constraints” remains.

  4. The QCDI Demand Model: Objective and Guidelines • Objective: easy to use demand model that provides quantitative representation of NC needs across the entire DOD • Serve as quantitative baseline for NC CPM • Illuminate investments likely to have greatest impact • Key Guidelines • Focus on steps to a fully interoperable joint network as reflected in CDI • Base on specific needs of various classes of users • Identify relatively small set of widely applicable metrics for 2012, 2016, 2020 CDIincrements • Estimate values representing an 80% solution, to serve as starting point for more detailed analysis • Facilitate assessment of supply provided by programs

  5. Key Features of QCDI Demand Model • 35 distinct metrics across the NC portfolio Tier-2 JCA areas (ES, IA, IT, and NM) • 10K+ discrete values for these metrics capturing specific needs per user class, areas, and timeframes • Metrics designed to represent both user needs (demand), and be translatable to/from common program documentation (supply) • Derived from CDI and approved standards, warfighter inputs, scenarios, capability documents, etc. • Metrics viewable at the unit level for 390+ actual units from all Services to allow determination of demand for a JTF or component thereof • Metrics and values captured in spreadsheet format for easy use by the community

  6. Tiers 4-6 Tiers 0-3 and Fixed Base Tiers 7+ A B C D E G F User Needs Framework (W/2009 Updates) A-G designations used for clear/consistent reference to each area

  7. Req Docs Studies CDI JNOArch Key Elements/Relationships of QCDI Demand Model 8 1 2 Metrics Framework Estimation Methodology Assumptions – Rationale 3 7 4 5 6 database

  8. Req Docs Studies CDI JNOArch User and Metrics Frameworks 8 1 2 Metrics Framework Estimation Methodology Assumptions – Rationale 3 7 4 5 6 database

  9. Choosing Widely Applicable Metrics • Metrics must apply to wide range of use cases and programs • Describing needs in terms of user’s access devices meets applicability and measurability challenge • Internet service providers employ device approach to estimated future demand • Commercial research groups such as Nemertes have successfully used this approach • Three types of devices used: LOS, BLOS, Wired Other Approaches Considered • Applications: • Unpredictable evolution • Varies by User • IERs/Data Types • Mission Specific • Millions of data points • Assumed Architecture • Program specific • Service driven • Thread/Vignette • Limited Applicability • Aggregation issues • Campaign Effectiveness • Typically undervalues the contribution of the network • Limited future perspective Why Use Device Approach • Users can express needs in terms of device characteristics more clearly than in terms of IT nodes, architectures, standards, etc. • Devices tend to evolve at predictable rates, allowing meaningful projections of future demand. • Devices with a given set of performance characteristics can support a large array of applications across a wide range of scenarios. This allows meaningful assessment of need at the device level for most users and scenarios. • Information superiority will require providing our forces better device level information exchange than potential adversaries.

  10. QCDI Metrics by Tier II Capability • Information Transport • Typical Req. DR (Mbps) • Protected Comm. DR (Mbps) • Voice DR (Mbps) • Availability (%) • Voice Packet Delivery Ratio (%) • Packet Delivery Ratio (%) (min) • Comm. Set-up time (min) (max) • Data End-to-End Delay (sec) (max) • Voice End-to-End Delay (sec) (max) • Upload (%) • External Traffic (%) • Enterprise Services • Amt. Assured Data Storage (GB) • Service Discovery Requests (Req/Hr) • Chat Requests (Req/Hr) • Auth. Serv (Req/Hr) • Email (Req/Hr) • Search (Req/Hr) • File Dlvry (Req/Hr) • DNS (Req/Hr) • Service Discovery Response Time (sec) • Information Assurance • Cross-Domain Transfer Time (sec) • Validation Time (min) • Authorization Management Time (min) • Pedigree production rate (%) • DAR compromise time (days) • Compliant COMSEC Tier • Incident Detection Time (min) • Incident Response Time (min) • Network Management • Interoperability Depth - Higher Network Tiers • Response Time (sec) • Time to Refresh contextual SA (sec) • Priority Information Delivery Mgt (%) • Connection Resilience (%) • End User Device RF Spectrum Eff (bps/Hz) • RF Spectrum Reallocation Time (sec)

  11. Req Docs Studies CDI JNOArch User-Level Demand Values 8 1 2 Metrics Framework Estimation Methodology Assumptions – Rationale 3 7 4 5 6 database

  12. B C A D E CDI G +Architectural Assumptions +Technical Feasibility +Existing Body of Work F Deriving Warfighter Needs • Establish warfighter need framework • User needs vary by domain and echelon • Users needs mitigated by what is feasible • Use CDI to identify appropriate metrics and values • Architectural assumptions documented • Other sources and engineering judgment applied • Needs vary by time Capability Improvements User Needs Framework User Metrics and Values

  13. Req Docs Studies CDI JNOArch Aggregate Demand of Units 8 1 2 Metrics Framework Estimation Methodology Assumptions – Rationale 3 7 4 5 6 database

  14. Unit Level Aggregation • Values Are Typically Needed for Units vs. Individuals • Map actual unit TO&E information to User Classes • Determine # of user in each class per unit • Develop with TO&E information from Services • Determine and apply appropriate aggregation scheme • Different metrics aggregate differently • Aggregation scheme supports looking a various size task forces with varying compositions Sample: User Class mapping by unit Sample: Partial aggregation of IT values for HBCT Using Detailed Unit Data Methodology Supports Determination of both Quality and Quantity of Systems Needed at different echelons

  15. Req Docs Studies CDI JNOArch QCDI Demand Exploration Tool 8 1 2 Metrics Framework Estimation Methodology Assumptions – Rationale 3 7 4 5 6 database

  16. Exploring QCDI Demand DataTool for Viewing Demand Data and Assessing Sensitivities • Allow simple means for user to navigate through extensive demand data base • Users can mine and analyze demand data simply from worksheets; display aggregated & disaggregated data

  17. Tool provides Monte Carlo capability to examine How Range of inputs and Distribution Affect Output Distribution of Response Times for a Light Infantry Brigade in 2012

  18. Summary of Recent QCDI Support to Other Taskings *

  19. Scenarios/Network Needs Examined Using QCDI • Army and Marine forces in high intensity ground operations • Joint air forces in major combat operations • Naval forces in active cyber threat environment • JTF and various headquarters in deployed operations in support of irregular and traditional operations • Brigade and below in counter insurgency and irregular operations • Maritime Dynamic Targeting • Use/need for aerial networks by ground and naval forces • Global demand of DoD • Demand associated with stand-up of new bases

  20. Summary of Work to Refine Model in 2009 Expanded Statistical basis of Model Refined User Classes for command posts Refined non-human user demand Smart Agents Unmanned Systems Increased fidelity of infrastructure model Evolved model to better estimate demand from emerging classes of devices not always directly connected to the joint network Develop specific fixed-base representations and refined representation of deployed Air Force units 20 20

  21. CY-2010 Recommendation to Further Enable Application of QCDI/Expand the Model • Funded • Irregular Warfare Version • 1st Iteration available June 2010 • Modifications necessary to capture emerging needs associated with COIN and other IW ops • Cyber Metrics Expansion/Refinement • Expand model beyond current IA/NM metrics • Quantify needs of Cyber users/functions • Demand Parsing Methodology • Repeatable technique for expressing QCDI resulting in link-by-link mode • As Additional Resources are Available • Open Loop Demand Model • 2024 Epoch

  22. QCDI Summary • Versions 1 and 2 of the demand model are complete and data is available to the NC community: qcdi.rand.org (password required) • Model added to OSD/CAPE M&S tools registry: https://jds.cape.osd.mil/Default.aspx (CAC required) • Applied/Currently being applied to approximately 20 major studies/analysis efforts across DoD • Additional detail and assistance with application of model and data available through the NC CPM SE&I Team • NC CPM POC: Heather.Schoenborn@osd.mil

More Related