An Analytic Framework for Assessing Artificial Intelligence and Assistive Automation Enabled Command and Control Decision Aids for Mission Effectiveness
Main Article Content
Research
Assessment Framework, Analytic Hierarchy Process, Combat Simulation, Artificial Intelligence, Decision Aids
Abstract
The U.S. Army has significant interest in operationalizing Artificial Intelligence and Assistive Automation (AI/AA) technologies on the battlefield to help collate, classify, and clarify multiple streams of situational and sensor data to provide a Commander with a clear, accurate operating picture to enable rapid and appropriate decision-making. This paper offers a methodology integrated with combat simulation output data into an analytic assessment framework. This framework helps assess AI/AA enabled Decision Aids for command and control with respect to mission effectiveness. Our methodology is demonstrated via a real-world operational vignette of an AI/AA-augmented Battalion assigned to clearing a sector of the battlefield. Results indicate that the simulated scenario with an AI/AA advantage modeled led to a higher expected mission effectiveness score.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
The copyediting stage is intended to improve the flow, clarity, grammar, wording, and formatting of the article. It represents the last chance for the author to make any substantial changes to the text because the next stage is restricted to typos and formatting corrections. The file to be copyedited is in Word or .rtf format and therefore can easily be edited as a word processing document. The set of instructions displayed here proposes two approaches to copyediting. One is based on Microsoft Word's Track Changes feature and requires that the copy editor, editor, and author have access to this program. A second system, which is software independent, has been borrowed, with permission, from the Harvard Educational Review. The journal editor is in a position to modify these instructions, so suggestions can be made to improve the process for this journal.
References
Aliotta, J. (2022). Army, west point hit milestone with robotics project. U.S. Army. Retrieved from https://www.army.mil/ article/254202/army\_west\_point\_hit\_milestone\_with\_robotics\_project
Center, D. T. I. (2013). Afsim: The air force research laboratory’s approach to making M&S ubiquitous in the weapon system concept development process. CSIAC Journal, 1(4). doi: 10.21474/CSIAJ.2013.01.04.05
Cobb, A., Jalaian, B., Bastian, N., & Russell, S. (2021). Robust decision-making in the internet of battlefield things using bayesian neural networks. IEEE.
Hordyk, A. R., & Carruthers, T. R. (2018). A quantitative evaluation of a qualitative risk assessment framework: Examining the assumptions and predictions of the Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA). PloS one, 13(6).
King, R., Churchill, E. F., & Tan, C. (2017). Designing with data: Improving the user experience with a/b testing. O’Reilly Media, Inc.
Letham, B., & Bakshy, E. (2019). Bayesian optimization for policy search via online offline experimentation. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 20, 145–1.
McGuinness, B., & Ebbage, L. (2002). Assessing human factors in command and control: Workload and situational awareness metrics. Defense Technical Information Center.
McKeon, A. (2022). Can artificial intelligence apply gaming to military strategy? northrop grumman. Retrieved from https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/can-artificial-intelligence-apply-gaming-to -military-strategy/
Pascoe, S., Bustamante, R., Wilcox, C., & Gibbs, M. (2009). Spatial fisheries management: a framework for multi-objective qualitative assessment. In (Vol. 52, pp. 130–138).
PEOSTRI. (2023). One semi-automated forces. Retrieved from https://www.peostri.army.mil/onesaf
Saaty, R. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3–5), 161–176. doi: 10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
Shaneman, S., George, J., & Busart, C. (2022). Scaling distributed artificial intelligence/machine learning for decision domi- nance in all-domain operations. In Artificial intelligence and machine learning for multi-domain operations applications (Vol. IV (Vol. 12113, p. 19–32). SPIE.
Srivastava, A., & Thomson, S. (2009). Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research.
TechTarget. (2017). Modeling and simulation (m&s). Retrieved from https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/ definition/modeling-and-simulation-MS
USMA. (2023). Combat simulation lab. Retrieved from https://www.westpoint.edu/academics/academic-departments/systems-engineering/combat-simulation-lab
Violante, M. G., & Vezzetti, E. (2017). Kano qualitative vs quantitative approaches: An assessment framework for products attributes analysis. Computers in industry, 86, 15–25.
West, T., & Birkmire, B. (2020). Afsim: The air force research laboratory’s approach to making m&s ubiquitous in the weapon system concept development process – csiac. Retrieved from https://csiac.org/articles/ afsim-the-air-force-research-laboratorys-approach-to-making-ms-ubiquitous-in-the-weapon-system-concept-development-process/.
How to Cite
