Overview Mo#va#on:ontologybaseddatafusionforC2 Review - PDF document

5/14/09 BML
Enabled

 Informa1on
Exchange
Framework
 
in
SES
ontology
for
C2
 Hojun
Lee

 




Bernard
P.
Zeigler
 Arizona
Center
for
Integra1ve
Modeling
&
Simula1on
 University
of
Arizona
 and

 RTSync
Corp

 Overview 
 • Mo#va#on:
ontology‐based

data
fusion
for
C2
 • Review
 
the
Informa#on
Exchange
Framework
(IEF)
and
the
 – System
En#ty
Structure
(SES)
 – JDL
Data
Fusion
Process
Model
 BaJle
Management
Language
(BML)
 – • Approach
to
integra#ng
BML
into
the
IEF
in
the
 C2
Data
Fusion
Context
 • Resul#ng
Architecture
for
C2
Data
Fusion
 • Conclusions/Future
Work

 1

5/14/09 C2
Needs
for
Ontology‐based
Data
Fusion
Framework 
 • C2
needs
informa#on
 – First
step
to
plan
military
opera#ons
is
gathering
informa#on.
 – More
refined
informa#on
is
more
valuable.
 • C2
systems
need
an
Informa#on
Exchange
Framework
 (IEF)
to

supports
requests
for
high
level
informa#on
as
 well
as
simple
object
data
from
various
informa#on
 sources
 • BaJle
Management
Language
(BML)
expresses
user
 requirements
and
invokes
informa#on
exchange
process
 in
SES
ontology.
 Informa1on
Exchange
Framework 
 2

5/14/09 Approach
to
Integra1ng
BML
into
the
Informa1on
 Exchange
Framework 
 Extend
BML
to
express
reports
 
to
match
levels
of
requests
 Develop
Pruning
and
 Transforma1on
 Opera1ons
to
sa1sfy
 the
BML
request
 Develop
SESs
for

 Extend
BML
to
express
requests
for

 • 
Radar
 • AirTargets:
Level
1
info
 • 
Rela1ons
 • AirSitua1on:
Level
2
info
 • 
Threats
 • AirThreat:
Level
3
info
 JDL
Data
Fusion
Process
Model(1/2) 
 Refinement
processes
in
sensor
networks
mapping
raw
 data
into
useable
products
 Joint Directors of Laboratories (JDL) Model 3

5/14/09 JDL
Data
Fusion
Process
Model
(2/2) 
 • Level
0

a
preprocessing
step
on
sensor
level
 • Level
1
(Object
Refinement)
–

refine
the
objects
or
 en##es’
representa#on
 • Level
2
(Situa#on
Refinement)
–
describe
the
current
 rela#onships
among
en##es.
 • Level
3
(Threat
Refinement)
–

project
current
situa#on
to
 the
near
future
 • Level
5
(User
Refinement)
–

 emphasis
on
user
role
since
 higher
level
informa1on
is
related
to
temporal/
spa1al
 coordinates
specified
by
users
  
corresponds
to
the
pragma#c
frame
in
IEF
 Background‐System
En1ty
Structure
(SES) 
 A formal framework for ontology development • especially to enable automation in modeling and simulation • applicable to complex data-engineering • set-theoretically defined • implemented in XML-based SES-Builder En1ty :
real
world
objects,
made
of
other
children
 • en##es.
 Aspect :
represents
the
labeled
decomposi#on
rela#on
 • between
the
parent
and
the
children.
 • Specializa1on :
labeled
rela#on
that
expresses
 alterna#ve
choices
that
a
system
en#ty
can
take
on.

 • Mul1‐Aspect :
is
an
aspect
that
expresses
an
all
of
one
 kind
decomposi#on.

 • Variables :
are
slots
aJached
to
an
en#ty.
The
slots
can
 take
values
in
a
specific
type
and
range.

 • inheritance :
the
parent
and
any
child
of
a
 specializa#on
combine
their
individual
variables,
 aspects
and
specializa#ons
when
pruning
is
ac#vated
 4

5/14/09 System
En1ty
Structure:
Wine
Ontology
Example 
 WineGrowing entity aspect WineDec Wine Regions regionGrows multiple Region specialization aspect MultiAsp WineTasteSpec regionGrowsMultiAsp WineColorSpec wineCountry Region wineCountryDec RoseWineColor WhiteWineColor RedWineColor Region Wine SES
Supports
Structure
Mappings • Structural
opera#ons
in
SES
ontology
framework
 – Pruning:
opera#on
to
cut
off
unnecessary
structure
in
SES
 • Assign
some
values
to
specific
en##es
 • Trim
to
get
en##es
which
user
requires
 – Transforma#on:
mapping
from
one
ontology
to
another.
 • These
opera#ons
are
invoked
by
user
requirements
–
the
 pragma#c
frame
in
Informa#on
Exchange
Framework
(IEF)
 5

5/14/09 Ba]le
Management
Language
(BML) 
 A
formal
command
and
control
language
 • – An
unambiguous
language
used
to
command
and
control
forces
and
equipment
 conduc1ng
military
opera1ons

 – to
provide
for
situa1onal
awareness
and
shared,
common
opera1onal
pictures

 – understandable
to
humans
and
machines
 Intended
to
bridge
gap
between
 • – C2
system
(Human)
and
simulated
forces
(Machines).
 – C2
system
(Human)
and
real
forces
(Human).
 – C2
system
(Human)
and
robo1c
forces
(Machine)
in
future

 • Order
and
Request
 – OB
 → 
Verb
Tasker
Taskee
(Affected
|
Ac#on)
Where
Start‐When
(End‐When)
Why
 Label
(Mod)*
 • Report
 RB
 → 
 task‐report 
Verb
Executer
(Affected
|
Ac#on)
Where
When
(Why)
Certainty
 – Label
(
Mod)*
 RB
 → 
 event‐report 
EVerb
(Affected
|
Ac#on)
Where
When
Certainly
Label
(Mod)*
 – – RB → 

 status‐report 
Hos#lity
Regarding
(Iden#fica#on
Status‐value)
Where
When
 Certainty
Label
(Mod)*
  
Focus
on
Request
and
Report
 Extending
BML
to
the 
 
Informa1on
Exchange
Framework 
 BML
is
extended
to
express
military
pragma#c
frames
for
high
level
 • informa#on
fusion
in
sensor
networks
 • Request
 – OB
 → 
 request 
Contents
Tasker
Taskee
(Affected
|
Ac#on)
Interest‐ Where
(Tasker‐Where)
Start‐When
(End‐When)
(Interval‐When)
 Why
Label
(Mod)*
 – Apply
various
‘Contents’
for
mul#‐level
info
request.
 • AirTargetsInfo:
Level
1
info
 • AirSitua#on:
Level
2
info
 • AirThreat:
Level
3
info
 – Add
‘Tasker‐Where’
and
‘Interval‐When’
for
high
level
info
 process.
 6

5/14/09 Extending
BML
for
IEF
(Cont’d) • Report
 – RB → 

 status‐report 
Hos#lity
(Rela#ons/ Situa#on)
(Threat)
Regarding
(Iden#fica#on
 Status‐value)
Where
When
Certainty
Label
 (Mod)*
 – Add
‘Rela#ons/Situa#on’
and
‘Threat’
for
level
 2/3
info.
 Transforma1on
and
Pruning:
Rela1on
to
Threat
SESs 
 Determine
Rela1ons
by
features
 Rela#on‐SES
 • Affilia1on
by
iff
 • Speed
by
velocity
 • Aggressiveness
by
other
reports
 • Distance
by
rela1ve
distance
 range
between
targets
and
users
 • Direc1on
by
rela1ve
target
 heading
 Example:
 A
target
is
hos#le,
slow,
neutral,
 away,
out
of
warning
range,
out
of
 Click to ac#on
range
from
the
commander.
 Expand Threat-SES Click to Predefined
Rules
map
the
set
of
 Expand rela1ons
to
the
threat
types
 in
Threat‐SES
 Example:
 
The
target
is
cau#ous.
 7

5/14/09 15
 16
 8

5/14/09 Resul1ng
Data
Fusion
System
Architecture 
 Conclusions 
 • We
proposed
an
informa#on
exchange
framework
for
 data
fusion
in
sensor
networks
 • Extended
BML
to
express
pragma#c
frames

in
a
 unambiguous
way
 • BML
requests
invoke
ontological
opera#ons
in
SES
to
 provide
threat
level
report
schemata
 • The
approach
casts
the
data
fusion
process
 development
within
an
ontological
framework
that
is
 amenable
to
modeling
and
simula#on

 9

5/14/09 Future
Work 
 • Study
compa#bility
of
our
approach
with
exis#ng
BML
 system.
 • Extend
framework
to
fabricate
the
whole
baJle‐field
 picture
including
ground
picture.
 • Study
interoperability
issues
with
another
message
 format
such
as
Cursor
on
Target
(CoT).
 • Further
development
for
GIG/SOA
Web
Services
context
 – Network
Centric
Enterprise
Services
(NCES)

and
Net
Enabled
C2
 (NECC)
may
benefit
from
the
BML
enhanced
Informa#on
 Exchange
Framework
 Books
and
Web
Links
 www.acims.arizona.edu
 Rtsync.com
 devsworld.org
 20
 10