《指挥控制本体国外英文教学课件PPT.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《指挥控制本体国外英文教学课件PPT.ppt（37页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、1,Proposed Application of Ontology within the U.S. C2 Core Effort,Ms. Leslie Winters, USJFCOM J87 Dr. Bill Mandrick, University of Buffalo*,* Supporting U.S. Army Center for Software Excellence and C2 Core Operational Content Working Group,2,Purpose,Describe U.S. efforts to apply ontology to the dev
2、elopment of the C2 Core*,* For XML-based data exchange internal to U.S.,3,Outline,C2 Core Overview C2 Core Semantics 9 Step Ontology Process C2 Domain Analysis C2 Core Ontology Conclusions Discussion,4,U.S. C2 Core Data Exchange Standard,5,C2 Core Concept,C2 Core standardizes the meaning and format
3、of the most commonly exchanged C2 data: Understandable, Interoperable,The C2 Core will standardize a subset of the C2 data vocabulary and provide a uniform methodology for building understandable and interoperable XML-based messages.,6,C2 Core Components,IES = Information Exchange Specification; the
4、 prescribed XML format for a C2 Core compliant message,IEP = Information Exchange Package; Actual XML message constructed according to IES,C2 CM and Vocabulary describe common C2 terms and their relationships.,C2 Specific Extensions to UCore are the reusable XML-based components of the C2 Core: the
5、building blocks for constructing C2 messages.,C2 Core messages are constructed from “reuseable components” using a common format and agreed upon meaning,7,C2 Core Development Approach,C2 Core Developed Collaboratively based on Existing Standards and IERs,8,C2 Core Architectural Framework,UCore-enabl
6、ed systems can understand all UCore message content except the Structured Payloads C2 Core-enabled systems can also understand C2 Core based Structured Payload Additional Structured Payloads from C2 COIs and/or PORs can fill in remaining concepts,9,C2 Core,Building C2 Core (Ontology Perspective),9,M
7、essage,Guides,Details,Bottom-Up,Data Exchange Requirements Messaging Requirements,Use cases, msgs, artifacts from the field,Doctrinal Publications,Top-Down,Represent Consensus: Names Structure Semantics Relationships,UCore Taxonomy / UCore-SL),C2 Core Ontology,produces,10,10,C2 Core,Using C2 Core (O
8、ntology Perspective),11,C2 Core Status,Independent Assessment Team Report, Dec 2008 DoD CIO Interim Guidance memo signed Mar 09 Cross-C/S/A C2 Core Working groups underway Tools and Technical Framework Operational Content (to include C2 Domain Ontology) Verification, Validation, and Implementation “
9、Testable Baseline” out 30 Jun 09; Approved by C2 Portfolio Data and Services Steering Committee 30 Jul 09 Initial reusable components, processes, conformance rules, documentation C2 Core V0.5 MAR 10; Continual maturation via iterative approach Version 1.0 4Q FY10 (suitable for early adopters and pil
10、oting/test events) Version 2.0 4Q FY11 (suitable for implementation assuming successful testing),12,C2 Core Semantics,13,9 Step Ontology Process,Initial Domain Analysis a) Identify Domain Boundaries b) Identify Categories and Sub-Categories c) Eye towards instance (tactical) level d) SME input 2) Id
11、entify Doctrinal Sources 3) Extract high-frequency terminology and definitions 4) Develop Taxonomy and Relations 5) Map to UCore 2.0 Taxonomy 6) Extend to Instance Level Terminology (Vocabularies) 7) Acquire SME Feedback 8) Revise 9) Field Ontology,Brief to here,14,C2 Domain Analysis,So, what is the
12、 C2 Domain? The C2 Domain consists of 6 components: Force Structure, Integration, Organization Situational Awareness Planning and Analysis Decision Making and Direction Operational Functions and Tasks Monitoring Progress (Assessing) C2 Core Ontology is based upon these elements Vocabulary derived fr
13、om Joint Doctrine,15,Command,Control,COMMANDER,SUBORDINATE COMMANDER,SUBORDINATE COMMANDER,SUBORDINATE COMMANDER,Source: USMC Doctrinal Publication 6,Force Structure and Integration,Operational Functions and Tasks,Situational Awareness,Planning and Analysis,Command Decision Making and Direction,C2 D
14、omain Analysis,Monitoring and Assessing,16,C2 Domain Analysis,Extend UCore one level down into C2 Core C2 Entities C2 Events Mid-Level (Utility) Ontology No specialized terms Organizes appropriate doctrinal terminology and semantics Incorporates actual data requirements Identifies requirements throu
15、gh/for scenarios, messages, data exchanges, models, . Requires SME participation and consensus,Bottom Up,Top Down,17,Top-Down and Bottom-Up Define One Synchronous Model,Ontology Defines objects, events and relations as they are in the world rather than as they are described in the context of a parti
16、cular messaging framework Provides a common source of semantics that enables consolidation of data from different domains/sources Optimized to enable aggregation of and inferencing on XML instances Data Exchange Components (reusable) Capture real data exchange requirements Consensus-based representa
17、tions Optimized for composition of XML components into IESs,17,18,JP 5-0 Joint Operation Planning JP 1-02 DoD Dictionary of Military and Related Terms JP 3-13.1 Joint Doctrine for Command and Control JP 3-0 Joint Operations FM 3-0 Operations MCDP Command and Control,C2 Core Ontology Doctrinal Source
18、s,19,High-Frequency Terminology,Getting to the Low-Hanging Fruit Reliable Data Sources Good C2 Models C2 Experience Apply 10/90 rule Use “Best Practices” SME Input,20,Taxonomy,Entity,Event,Role,Information Content Entity,Organization,Geographic Feature,Document,Planned Event,Humanitarian Assistance
19、Event,Terrorist Event,Military Event,UCore Thing,C2 Core,Grid Location,Target,Joint Operation,Joint Operation Plan,Military Unit,Campaign Plan Document,Engagement,Humanitarian Aid Operation,Battle,Campaign,Instance Level, Tactical Messages, IESs, IEPs,COI Vocabularies,21,The C2 Core Ontology,A Few E
20、xamples (Screenshots) From Protg,22,C2 Information Content Entities,Doctrinal Definition: A clear, concise statement of what the force must do and the conditions the force must meet to succeed with respect to the enemy, terrain, and the desired end state (FM 3-0).,23,C2 Core Ontology Events,Doctrina
21、l Definition: A C2 Process whereby Combatant Commanders and subordinate joint force commanders translate national or theater strategy into operational concepts through the development of an Operation Plan for a Campaign. (JP 1-02),Definitions based upon Joint Doctrine,24,Example,C2 Core Ontology Des
22、cribes the C2 Domain accurately With categories that extend from UCore 2.0 And acts as a middle (semantic) layer Establishes a systematic way of organizing the terms, entities, and events Using doctrinally sound terminology Some examples from JC3IEDM,25,Military Organizations,JC3IEDM Terms,UCore 2.0
23、 “Entities”,Bold Terms = C2 Core,26,Geographic Features,Area of Influence Area of Interest Area of Operations Area of Responsibility Phase Line,UCore Definition: Physical or cultural areas, regions or divisions that can be defined in terms of geographic coordinates. Derived from Geographic Names Inf
24、ormation Service. USGS. Accessed 10 March 2009. JC3IEDM Terms,High-Level JC3IEDM Terms are included in C2 Core Ontology,27,Information Entities,JC3IEDM Terms,C2 Core Definition: An entity which consists of information and which inheres in some information bearing entity.,28,Plans,MIP Configuration M
25、anagement Plan MIP Development Plan MIP Programme Management Plan Operations Plan Operations Order,C2 Core Definition: An information content entity that is a specification of events that are to occur in order to obtain some objective.,JC3IEDM Terms,C2 Core Ontology,29,Vehicles,JC3IEDM Terms,Some JC
26、3IEDM terms map directly to UCore terms,30,Operations,Military Operations Other Than War Civil/Military Operations Peace Support Operations Reconnaissance Non-combatant Evacuation Operations,JC3IEDM Terms,C2 Core Taxonomy “Events”,C2 Core Definition: The process of carrying on combat, including move
27、ment, supply, attack, defense, and maneuvers needed to gain the objectives of any battle or campaign. (JP 1-02),31,The Ontology,Features: Limited to 200+/- terms Commonly understood relations is a part of temporal part of participates in etc Results in Triples Allows for Unique Identifiers to be ass
28、igned to each instance Research in Referent Tracking Systems (Warehousing and Inferencing),32,Conclusions,The C2 Core Ontology: Describes the C2 Domain accurately Provides a systematic process for organizing the terms, entities, and events for Command and Control Uses categories that extend from UCo
29、re 2.0 Acts as a middle (semantic) layer connecting UCore 2.0 with C2 Core vocabularies,33,Discussion,34,Backups,35,DoD Net-Centric Data Strategy (2003) Ensure data are visible, accessible and usable DoDD 8320.02 (Dec 2004) DoD policy that Data is an essential enabler of network-centric warfare (NCW
30、) and shall be made visible, accessible, and understandable DoD 8320.02-G(Apr 2006) Identify data assets to share; Making data accessible by commonly supported access methods, understandablereaching agreement on the meanings CJCSI 8410.01 (Mar 2007) Services shall implement net-centric data sharing,
31、 by establishing appropriate plans, programs, policies, processes, & procedures according to DoDD 8320.02. DoD C2 Strategic Plan (Dec 2008) Successful implementation of data & services strategies for C2 capabilities requires identification of authoritative C2 data sources CJCSI 6212.01E (Dec 2008) t
32、o gain Interoperability & Supportability Certification, program data & services, must be “exposed” by making data elements & provided services visible, accessible, and understandable ASD(NII)/DoD CIO Memorandum (Mar 2009) Establishes an objective for the C2 CPM and DoD Components to identify data sh
33、aring requirementsDirects the development of a C2 Core DoD CIO Universal Core Memo (Jul 09) UCore, coupled with domain cores (e.g. C2 Core) has the potential to dramatically improve DoD internal and external information sharing”,Policy is Clear Authoritative Data Exposure and Common Data Exchange St
34、andards are Essential to Way Ahead,Guidance and Direction,36,Top-Down,Uses a mid-level or utility ontology. Details UCore for C2 domain. Organizes appropriate doctrinal terms and semantics. Helps identify potentially missing requirements. Helps inform data requirements analysis. Used as common frame
35、work to identify, name, and represent requirements as exchange components. Documents relationships and rules between objects.,36,37,37,Bottom-Up,Incorporates the actual data exchange requirements. Identifies requirements through/for scenarios, messages, data exchanges, models, . Consensus-based and NDR-conforming naming, structure, and semantics. Builds data representations that define the exchange of XML instances. Requires SME guidance and consensus.,