SUO Planning Decision Aids Austin Tate John Levine

SUO Planning & Decision Aids Austin Tate, John Levine, Peter Jarvis, Jeff Dalton, AIAI, University of Edinburgh David Wilkins, Tom Lee, SRI International Pete Haglich, ISX (for SRI) • Capability to generate, refine, select, communicate, execute and repair plans across multiple echelons from company level to platoon and squad level. • Two examples of Planning & Decision Aid use: – one offensive (MOUT); – one defensive (Halt an Attack in Restrictive Terrain).

SUO/PDA Preliminary Workplan Dec 98 --->Mar 99 Apr 99 ------>Jun 99 Jul 99 ------->Dec 99 Jan 00 --->Mar 00 Phase 1: Familiarization & Domain Modeling Phase 2: Demo Storyboard, Concept Proofs & Further Domain Modeling Phase 3: System Adaptation & Demo Production Phase 4: Transfer Of Results

Basic Planning Techniques The underlying plan representations must be done correctly to support the desired command control loop Planner Plans are doctrinally correct and of uniform high quality Plan: Actions&Constraints Situation Resources Constraints SOPs Objectives Advice Rapidly respond to events, changing actions and reallocating resources, comms. to other echelons if necessary Actions System Monitor working with the Commander Soldiers and Sensors in the Field (Apply SOPs)

Potential Technical Contributions to Draw On · Overall management of the command, planning and control process steps to improve coordination. · Situation dependent option filtering (sometimes reducing the choices normally open to one “obvious” one [Klein p. 17 -18]. · Satisficing search to find the first suitable plan that meets the essential criteria [Klein p. 20]. · Anytime algorithms which seek to improve on the best previous solution if time permits. · Expansion of a high level abstract plan into greater detail where necessary.

Potential Technical Contributions to Draw On · High level “chunks” of procedural knowledge (SOP, TTP) at a human scale [Klein p. 52]. · Retain a high level overview. [Klein, p. 227] “Include only the detail necessary to establish a plan is possible – do not fall into the trap of choreographing each of their movements”]. · Analysis of potential interactions as plans are expanded or developed [Klein p 53]. · Identification of problems, flaws and issues with the plan [Klein p. 63 & 71]. · Establishment of a space of alternative options based on different assumptions [Klein p. 23]. · Monitoring of the execution of events as they are expected to happen within the plan, watching for deviations (often ahead of problem) [Klein p. 32].

Potential Technical Contributions to Draw On · AI planning techniques represent the dynamic state of the world at points in the plan and can be used for “mental simulation” of the plan [Klein p. 45]. · Pruning of choices according to given requirements or constraints [Klein p. 94 “singular strategy”]. · Heuristic evaluation and prioritisation of multiple possible choices within the constraint search space [Klein p. 94]. · Repair of plans while respecting plan structure and intentions. · Uniform use of a common plan representation with embedded rationale to improve plan quality, shared understanding, etc.

Long-term Contributions of PDA to the Soldier • Shared plan representations cognisant of military principles, doctrine, SOPs and TTPs. Makes possible: • Doctrinally correct plans usable by everyone. • Fast generation of multiple distinct COAs, including ones the commander may not have considered. • Support commander creativity through human guidance. • Uniformly high plan quality, even during high-stress crises. • Continuous analysis of the plan using multiple metrics. • Monitor plan execution and respond quickly to events, helping the commander modify the plan appropriately. • Provide relevant information to other echelons, allowing fast communication while preserving bandwidth.

Technical Contributions by SRI/AIAI to SUO • Contribution to the representation of shared objectives, plans, processes, SOPs and TTPs in SUO. • Generation of multiple qualitatively distinct alternative COAs dependent upon alternative assumptions and advice about the situation. • Support for mixed-initiative incremental plan development, manipulation and use. • Situation-dependant plan repair as situation changes. • Systems integration framework for modular planning and plan analysis systems. • Management of planning and execution process - promotion of intelligent process management and workflow concepts.

SUO/PDA Input to SUO/SAS Program • Aim is to communicate and transfer some of the relevant results of the ARPI/PDA work to SUO. • To do this by joining in the SUO Community and understanding its requirements. • To demonstrate some appropriate and relevant Advanced Planning & Decision Aids Technology. • To be helpful to the contracting team(s). • AIAI/SRI want to act as a conduit to the work of others where they can see its potential relevance.

Context wrt FM 7 -10 & FM 7 -20 Processes • FM 7 -20 The Infantry Battalion, FM 7 -10 The Infantry Rifle Company and FM 7 -8 The Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad Command Control - Augmented by Respective Military Training Plans (MTPs) • Suggested as a point of comparison by Jim Madden, IDA • Context of diagram is an overall process involving perhaps several COAs and a command, planning, communication, execution and control process. • Diagram covers core part from FM 7 -10 of situation assessment and COA generation (relevant to SUO/SAS and SUO/PDA activities)

Conduct METT-T Analysis Mission (Assigned) • Next higher commanders con-cept of operations and intent? • Subunit tasks • Unit tasks - Specified? - Implied? • Limitations? Receive Mission Formulate Assumptions & Deductions • What is the unit’s purpose within the higher commander’s intent? • Which tasks allow the unit to accomplish its purpose? • What are the enemy’s most probable courses of action give the terrain and his probable objectives? • Where will contact first occur and how will enemy be arrayed? • What are probably enemy weaknesses and vulnerabilities? • • Enemy Composition? Disposition? Strength? Significant activities? Peculiarities and weaknesses? Enemy capabilities? Enemy probable courses of action? • • Terrain/Weather Analysis Obstacles? Avenues of approach? Key terrain? Observation and fields of fire? Cover and concealment? Weather? Other characteristics? • How do terrain/weather factors affect the soldiers/subunits? • How do terrain/weather factors effect placement of weapons? • Where can commander focus his combat power to accomplish his mission? • • • Troops Composition? Disposition? Strength? Significant activities? Peculiarities and weaknesses? • How can unit’s strength be focused on enemy weaknesses? • How can commander make his best use of is combat power given the current status of his units? Time Available • LD time/Defend no later time? • Time to begin movement? • Time available to plan? • Time available to prepare? • Time available to rehearse? • Time available for reconnaissance? Develop Course of Action Determine the decisive point where the enemy is most vulnerable. Ideally, where an enemy weakness is or where the enemy will be positioned at a time when the battalion can generate overwhelming combat power against the enemy Determine what supporting efforts are needed by asking the question, “What else must be done to allow the main effort to succeed? ” Determine purposes to be achieved by main and supporting efforts by linking the main effort’s purpose directly to the battalion’s purpose and the supporting efforts’ purposes directly to the main purpose Determine essential task(s) for subordinate units (main and supporting efforts) to achieve the purposes stated above Identify type of forces required to Determine essential task(s) for subordinate accomplish thesupporting mission, considering only units (main and efforts) to achieve organic and attached units. Weigh the main the purposes stated above effort; take more risk in non-main effort areas (economy of force) Do not consider assets such as CAS or FRASCAM, which may be unavailable during execution. Assign control measures to clarify responsibilities and synchronize the efforts of subordinates to support the main effort. Allow as much freedom of effort as possible What are the critical time aspects of the operation? Prepare a COA statement and sketch to enhance clarity. The sketch should show the 3 maneuver aspects of the COA

Opportunities for PDA Support in SUO Overall Process from Receipt of Mission to Success In Advance Deliberative Planning & Rehearsal En-route Rehearsal & Replanning During Mission After Action Low Tempo Adaptation & Plan Repair High Tempo Monitoring & Plan Selection After Action Planning & Support

More Detailed Slides If Required

ARPI/PDA Goal, Themes & Participants GOAL: Develop, demonstrate, and transition advanced knowledge-based technology for automatic and interactive planning, scheduling, and decision making to allow better, faster planning in complex, stressed situations ARPI DARPA Planning Under Uncertainty Brown University Rockwell Int’l U Washington U Wisconsin Workflow Management & Process Control ISTI U. Edinburgh MCC UCLA Integrated Planning & Scheduling Case-Based Planning CMU ISX Kestrel CMU Arizona St. University MITRE Modeling Simulation & Evaluation KB Planning Systems U. Mass U. Edinburgh Northwestern University U. Maryland U Oregon BBN Klein Representation & Intelligent KB USC/ISI SRI GE CRD U. Rochester Loral Honeywell

SUO Planning & Decision Aids SUO/PDA Objective Demonstrate capability to generate, refine, select, communicate, execute and repair plans across multiple echelons from company level to platoon and squad level relevant to SUO/SAS environment. Two examples of COA plan generation and use: - one offensive (MOUT); - one defensive (Halt an Attack in Restrictive Terrain). Advanced Planning Technology • • Use results of DARPA/AFRL Planning Initiative (ARPI) and Planning & Decision Aids (PDA) work Multi-Agent Planning Architecture (MPA) and O-Plan Systems Integration Architecture SIPE-2 and O-Plan Generative Planners Mixed Initiative Planning Aids Planning Domain Knowledge Acquisition Tools/Editors Schedule • 1 QCY 99 - Domain familiarization. Domain modeling. Create initial plan and activity templates for offensive and defensive scenarios. • 2 QCY 99 - SUO Scenario and storyboard/demo script development. Walk through of technology requirements, mockup of non-working parts. Produce demo script and scenarios. • 3 QCY 99 - Technology and demonstration development first pass, mock demonstration. Plan Repair Algorithms • 4 QCY 99 - Full demonstration development. Planning Process Panels • 1 QCY 00 - Transition and communication of results to SUO contractor. Refinement of demonstration and technology. Integration of further modules to support more effective demonstrations. Rich Shared Plan Representations

SUO/PDA Provisional Coordination Plan Agreed with ITT/SRI Contracting Team • 1 -Jul-99 Kick-off with delivery of SUO/PDA AIAI Phase 2 Report • 30 -Sep-99 Comments on scenario from ITT/SRI to SUO/PDA, agreement on SUO/SAS state descriptions used in scenario • 31 -Dec-99 SUO/PDA Demonstration • 1 -Jan-00 Technology Transfer Phase - Joint Work • 31 -Mar-00 ITT/SRI Team show link between SUO/SAS and SUO/PDA Demonstration. • ------- end of current SUO/PDA project --------- • 1 -Jan-00 Possible start on SUO/PDA Phase 3 Option • 31 -Dec-00 ITT/SRI SUO/PDA Deliverable • 30 -Jun-01 End of SUO Technology Transfer Phase

SUO/PDA Preliminary Systems Sketch Knowledge Acquisition Stage Modeller or Knowledge Engineer Army CALL Bulletins Doctrine, SOP, TTP Subject Matter Experts Process Modelling Methods & Tools Domain Model Activity Templates & Constraints

Echelon N-1 Planning & Execution System OPORD FRAGO Platoon Level OPORD FRAGO Echelon N Other Modules Planning Related Modules Echelon N+1 Other Modules Planning Related Modules Fire Team Level Reports Echelon N Planning & Execution System Domain Model Activity Templates & Constraints Echelon N-1 Planning Related Modules Company Level SUO/PDA Preliminary Systems Sketch Planning & Decision Aids Use Stage Reports Echelon N+1 Planning & Execution System

SUO/PDA Preliminary System Sketch Instantiation of Components Echelon N-1 Planning & Execution System OPORD FRAGO Echelon N Other Modules Planning Related Modules Platoon Level Echelon N+1 Other Modules Planning Related Modules Fire Team Level E. g. , Act Editor, CPF OPORD FRAGO Echelon N-1 Planning Related Modules Reports Echelon N Planning & Execution System Domain Model Activity Templates & Constraints E. g. , Mod. SAF, Sextant, Blue/Red Force Laydown Company Level E. g. , MPA, SIPE-2, O-Plan, ACP 3 Reports Echelon N+1 Planning & Execution System E. g. , Web O-Plan, O-P 3 E. g. , Plan Sketch Tool

Example of SRI ARPI/PDA Work Giving Advice to a Planner State of the World Beliefs, Resources, Constraints Heuristic search algorithm Actions One Might Take Commander’s Ø plans quickly Guidance Ø maintains all constraints SIPE-2 Planner Objectives Advice PLAN: Action Structure Operators Goals Actions SIPE-2 Execution Monitor and Replanner Integrating human judgement fixes many shortcomings of automated planning technology Advice: Ø qualitatively different COAs Ø “directed” search of options

Example of AIAI ARPI/PDA Work Edinburgh O-Plan Project CONCEPT COA-1 COA-2 NEW IDEAS Planning Workflow Option: COA-2 Phase: Deployment Criteria 1 Criteria 2 Criteria 3 World View • Using domain constraints to support the coordinated development of plans. . • Communication between users acting as Task Assigner and Planner. Order Issued: . . Option COA-2 Authority: . . . Plan View • Intelligent workflow model of planning based on “issue” handling (agenda/to-do list). Task Direction & Plan Analysis Plan Development & Refinement . . . Task Assigner • Simplified planner interfaces to allow ”plug and plan” component integration. Planner IMPACT • Generation of multiple qualitatively distinct alternative COAs dependent upon alternative assumptions concerning the emerging crisis. • Support for mixed-initiative incremental plan development, manipulation and use. • Promotion of intelligent process management and workflow concepts. • Integration framework for large-scale modular planning systems. • Contribution to shared plan representations. • Uniform manipulation of plans as a set of constraints (<I-N-OVA> model). MILESTONES (1996 -98) Q 4/Y 1 • MIP Demonstration in Pacifica NEO • Initial Evaluation Matrix • Demonstration scenario development Q 4/Y 2 • • Workflow Planning Aid Experiments TIE with Rochester on Tasking Release of O-Plan Version 3. 1 Evaluation Experiments Interim Report Q 4/Y 3 • • Mixed Initiative Planning Demo. TIE with USC/ISI on plan evaluation Release of O-Plan Version 3. 2 Final Evaluation Report