INFORMATION SUPERIORITY WORKSHOP II Focus on Metrics

1
INFORMATION SUPERIORITY WORKSHOP IIFocus on
Metrics

• Working Group 4Focus on Synchronization
  Introductory Material
• D. SignoriD. Anhalt
• March 28, 29 2000

2
CHARGE TO THE SYNCHRONIZATION WORKING GROUP

• Explore Synchronization
• The essential aspects of synchronization
• Significance in military operations
• Means of achieving synchronization
• Define a spectrum of concepts to achieve
  synchronization
• Reflect IS capabilities and new operational
  concepts
• Candidates for experimentation enabled by metrics
• Develop Metrics
• Quality of synchronization
• Implications for C2 Process
• Impact on operational outcome
• Develop output
• Essential concepts
• Hierarchy of measures

3
EXPLORING SYNCHRONIZATION

• What is it? Possible Definition
• An output characteristic of a C2 process
• Facilitates the execution of military operations
  in a coordinated way
• Provides maximum effect and with minimum expense
  of resource
• Why its importance in military operations
  growing
• Key to focusing mass, firepower and effects
• Growing demand for rapid precision application
  of force
• Pressure to do more with less
• Why is it becoming difficult to improve
  synchronization in military operations
• Large numbers of physical entities
  Trend toward distributed operations
• Many degrees of freedom
  Less tolerance to enemy countermeasures
• Increasing speed and precision
  Limits to centralized control
• How can information superiority help achieve
  improved synchronization
• Increased richness of information enables high
  precision
• Increased reach of information enables more
  entities to be influenced
• Potential to focus complex behavior through wide
  spread sharing of awareness/intent

4
CONCEPTS RELATED TO SYNCHRONIZATION

• Delamination of the economy of things and
  economy of information
• Things hard to get and hard to use
• Information hard to get but easy to use thru
  networking
• Synchronization involves interface between
  virtual and real
• Control Systems
• Inertia of physical things provide limits to
  speed of synchronization
• Plant model in control theory provides
  description of dynamics
• Feed back control law determine rate of
  adaptation and convergence
• Complex adaptive systems
• Simple intelligent agents with situation
  information and rules
• Agents linked together e.g., using feed back
  control structure
• Self organizing emergent behavior e.g.,
  swarming
• Entropy
• Lack of synchronization seen as disorganization
• Measures of disorganization have roots in
  thermodynamics and information theory
• Probability measures that reflect degree of
  confidence in state of system

Concepts based in science, mathematics,
engineering and the new economy
5
CENTRALIZATION/DECENTRALIZATION OF AUTHORITY
RELEVANT TO A CRISIS PERROWS AUTHORITY RULES
Interactions
Linear
Complex
CENTRALIZATION for tight coupling. CENTRALIZATION
compatible with linear interactions (expected,
visible) Dams, power grids, some continuous
processing, rail and marine transport
CENTRALIZATION to cope with tight coupling
(unquestioned obedience, immediate
response). DECENTRALIZATION to cope with
unplanned interactions of failures (careful, slow
search by those closet to subsystems). Nuclear
plants, weapons DNA, chemical plants, aircraft,
space missions
Tight
Coupling
1
2
3
4
DECENTRALIZATION for complex
interactions desirable. DECENTRALIZATION for
loose coupling desirable (allows people to devise
indigenous substitutions and alternative paths),
since system accident possible.Mining, RD
firms, multi-goal agencies (welfare, DOE, OMB),
universities.
CENTRALIZATION or DECENTRALIZATION possible.
Few complex interactions component failure
accidents can be handled from above or below.
Tastes of elites and tradition determine
structure. Most manufacturing, tradeschools,
single-goal agencies (motor vehicles, post
office).
Loose
6
A SPECTRUM OF C2 OPTIONS FOR ACHIEVING
SYNCHRONIZATION
Nonlinearity Spectrum
Equilibrium
Mildly Complex
Complex
Chaos
Perrow Quadrants (Interactions/Coupling and
Centralization/Decentralization
1
2
3
4
Complex/Tight
Linear/Tight
Linear/Loose
Complex/Loose
Either
Centralized
Neither
Decentralized
C2 Structural Options
Self Organizing Request/Bids
Fully Centralized
Guidance/ Autonomy
Bid-A-Task
No Organi-zation
Emerging E-commerce Emphasis
Historical Military Emphasis
7
Some Structural Options for C2
Fully Centralized
Guidance/Autonomy
Strategy
CMD CENTER
COMMANDER
Self Organizing (Requests/Bids)
Bid-A-Task
CMD Center or CMDR
Task
Mission
BULLETIN BOARD
Network
8
Illustrative Example Agile Synchronization of
Effects
Action
Degree ofCollaboration
Action
Decision
Action

Degree ofSharing
Synchronized Effects
Commanders Intent Situation Awareness
Operational
Environment
Degree ofIntegration
Sensor
KnowledgeBaseComponent
Sensor
Sensor
9
Illustrative Example Agile Synchronization
Effects
Quality of Decisions
Extent of Agreement
Fraction of Decisions based on info vs orders
Level of Interaction
Action
Degree ofCollaboration
Action
Decision
Action
Consistency
Commonality

• Degree of Shared Understanding
• Degree of Understanding

Degree ofSharing
Synchronized Effects
Commanders Intent Situation Awareness
Operational
Environment
Quality of Information
Accessibility
Level of Interoperability
Velocity
Utility
Network Connectivity
Degree of Integration
Sensor
Sensor
KnowledgeBaseComponent
Sensor
10
TOP LEVEL SYNCHRONIZATION MEASURES

• Complexity
• Degree of Nonlinearity
• Tightness of Coupling
• Quality
• Correlation/Coherence/Concurrency/ Consistency of
  Behavior of Entities
• Percent of event sequences that mesh in manner
  consistent with Commanders Guidance
• Effect
• Timeliness of C2 Cycle Effectiveness of Force
• Resources Expended Measure of Mission Outcome

11
SOME ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION

• Focus of Working Group
• Synchronization vs. Organization
• Priorities
• Actual metrics vs. other topics
• Synchronization metric vs other metrics
• Method
• Activities done together
• Activities partioned

Focus of time and effort?