Resolution of Ambiguity through HUMINT An M&S Methodology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Resolution of Ambiguity through HUMINT An M&S Methodology Briefing to ISMOR 29 August 2007

Topics • Project Overview. • Ambiguity on the Battlefield. • Project Scope. • Project Approach. • Ambiguity/HUMINT Methodology Overview. • Summary & Status. • Information. 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 2

Project Overview Problem: M&S generally do not portray the ambiguity that influences the operational decision making on the battlefield. Additionally, HUMINT, a source to help resolve ambiguity, is only portrayed in a gross, implicit way. • Project Purpose: Develop model methodologies that can be used to better represent ambiguity and the contribution of HUMINT in resolving that ambiguity, where HUMINT is defined as: – “The collection by a trained HUMINT collector of foreign information from people and multimedia to identify elements, intentions, composition, strength…” (FM 2-0, Intelligence) • Project Result: The resulting methodology prescribes, through requirements definition and model representations: – Multiple sides with varying and dynamic allegiances . – Perceived truths that include enemy intent . – Intelligence source reliability and cooperation factors . – HUMINT collection functionality . The methodology provides a means for M&S to adapt to and represent the dynamic nature of today’s battlefield. The methodology is currently being implemented in both analytic and training models and helping revise doctrine. 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 3

Ambiguity on the Battlefield The project’s intent is to represent in M&S, the ambiguity a commander faces in making decisions, the actions he takes to resolve ambiguity (e.g., HUMINT), and their consequences in terms of the impacts on ambiguity and operations. Battlefield No Longer Ground Truth Conditions • What’s the enemy doing? t c • Enemy Locations Ambiguity a • What and where is his next p • Enemy Composition m action? I • Enemy Activity • Whose information can I • Terrain rely on and to what Actions degree? • Environment • Maneuver • Etc. • Fires I n • Allegiances f • Etc. l u • Enemy Intent e • Human Intel n c Collection Operational e • Civil Military Impacts Operations • Humanitarian New Relief • Psychological Cdr’s Decisions Operations • Coercion • Security Produce 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 4

Project Scope The team scoped the project to achieve credible representation while focusing on high-payoff factors. • Project focused on: – Elements of ambiguity related to information quality and quantity as well as the commander’s perception of the information. – Only active HUMINT collection, vice passive, where active is a collection effort initiated to ascertain specific information. – Representation of processes, capabilities, and effects at the tactical and operational levels. – Development of processes for combat simulation models, not performance or engineering models. • Resulting methodology adaptable for: – Current and future operational environments, with Threat considerations represented in the data. – Aggregate and entity-level processes. – Deterministic and stochastic models. – Constructive and human-in-the-loop (HITL) models. – Analytic and training models. 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 5

Project Approach The approach consists of four principal stages: Problem Requirements Methodology Implementation 1 2 3 4 Decomposition Development Development and Testing 1a. Develop • Existing HUMINT M&S methodologies. 3. Develop Taxonomy & Methodologies Conduct Literature Review • Methodologies to • Model implement requirements. • Military HUMINT requirements. • User processes. 2. Develop – Stochastic. requirements. Requirements • Elements/causes – Deterministic. of ambiguity. – Entity. • Information • Real-world – Aggregate. provided by process 1c. Develop HUMINT to resolve description. – Constructive. Real-World ambiguity. – HITL. Process • Motivating factors Description of human sources. • Role of HUMINT in 4. Implement as the decision Proof-of- making process. Principle & Test • Key aspects Legend: of real-world processes. 1b. Develop Inputs Outputs Key Threads 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 6

Ambiguity/HUMINT Methodology Overview The Ambiguity/HUMINT methodology follows the real-world process. Identification of Conditions BC Planning and Collection Asset Allocation Ambiguity -- What do we know, what don’t • Intelligence reports • Commander’s we know? critical information • Enemy Information requirements (CCIR) - Unit • Collection team tasks -- Activity -- Disposition -- Composition - Intent • Politics, State Updating Decision, Action Perception of • Sides, Allegiances & Evaluation Conditions - Non-combatants • Tactical action - Factions • Allegiances • Non-kinetic action - Para-military • Faction perceptions - Unknowns • Commander’s influencers 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 7

Identification of Conditions The methodology requires starting conditions that introduce ambiguous conditions and allow for the commander’s influence of those conditions. Commander Identification of Develops/Updates Conditions CCIR HUMINT-Related BC Planning & Asset Allocation Information Items • Intent • Operational Environment - Intent-What - Intent-Where • Commander’s Perceptions Commander - Intent-When - Sides, Factions, Allegiances - Intent-Why Influences Conditions - Relationships between Sides - Intent-How -- Cooperation Level - Intent-On Whom -- Reliability of Source - Intent-By Whom • Civil Military Operations -- Quantity of Intel • Allegiance/Side • Humanitarian Relief •Collection behavior (ROE) • Activity • Psychological Operations • Time • Fire and Effects • Disposition • Coercion - Direction • Security - Speed - Orientation Commander - Location -Composition Evaluates Intel Not portrayed in most models - # Personnel Decision, Action & Evaluation - # Equipment 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 8

Identification of Cooperation Matrix Conditions In the developed methodologies, the perceived cooperation levels between sides can be represented as percentages in a matrix. Level Range Band Provider of Intel Always Cooperative 99.9 to 100% % B R G P Y Very Cooperative 81 – 99.8% Cooperative 61 - 80% Marginally Cooperative 41 - 60% B 100 0 75 30 30 Uncooperative 21 - 40% Very Uncooperative Receiver of Intel 1 - 20% R 0 100 15 60 1 Never Cooperative 0 - .9% This range of percentages are G 60 15 100 40 30 used by the SME to establish the start condition or initial Cooperation Matrix. P 1 75 30 100 1 Y 1 1 25 1 100 Green provides 75% of its knowledge to Blue; while Blue only provides 60% to Green. 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 9

BC Planning and Asset Allocation The starting point of all intelligence collections are the CCIR that focus available intel assets (human and mechanical sensors) on those collections. Identification of Commander/Staff Conditions Determines Need (Recognition of For More Intel Ambiguity) Decision, Action & Evaluation Commander Collection Manager Develops/Updates Staff Develops IR Determines Intel CCIR Domain HUMINT Collection • Signals Manager - Comms Intel (COMINT) Determines Asset - Electronics Intel (ELINT) • Imagery Intel (IMINT) HCT HCT • Measurement & Signatures Intel (MASINT) SFOD-A • Human Intel (HUMINT) SMU Collection LRSD Manager Tasks Scouts Collector Collection 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 10

Collection Subject to mission requirements, collectors of intel behave in much the same manner as any typical maneuver element (e.g., subject to attrition, detection) and report their findings for analysis and evaluation. Commander Evaluates Intel Decision, Action & Evaluation Collector Reports Findings • Direct to Cdr Collector • To Intel Fusion Executes Mission Collection Team Behaviors Collection Manager Tasks • Move to Area of Interest - Terrain Reasoning Collector - Subject to Attrition • Avoid hostile forces Collection Manager • Conducts self-defense • Disengage/break contact Determines Asset BC Planning and Asset Allocation • Time at Area of Interest • Collect Intel 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 11

Decision – Action - Evaluation Once evaluated, the intel may give the Commander reason for action in the form of tactical commitments or operational influencers. Commander Collection Manager Collector Reports Influences Conditions Determines Int BC Findings Collection Updating Perception of Planning & Asset Allocation Conditions Commander/Staff Determines Need For More Intel Commander /Staff Commander Evaluates Intel Conducts MDMP Unit Conducts Opns Conditions Change 16 August 2007 HUMINT brief to ISMOR 12