Advertisement

Benchmarking framework for command and control mission planning under uncertain environment

  • Yanghe FengEmail author
  • Wei Shi
  • Wei Shi
  • Guangquan Cheng
  • Jincai Huang
  • Zhong Liu
Focus
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

As the core of the military information system, the command and control (C2) mission planning suffers from the high complexity, environmental uncertainty. To address this problem, many studies highlight the agility and resilience of C2-organizations and propose many solutions. However, there is no benchmark to compare these models and methods. In order to understand such organization’s dynamic and emergence behaviors, this paper presents a benchmark framework of C2 decision-making under uncertainty environment. This is a basic case on multi-force joint operation. We present an optimization model and a horizon partition algorithm aimed to plan an optimal organizational structure with higher operational flexibility, low cost and high performance. Finally, we explore the main traditional models on the benchmark case. The result shows the proposed model is competitive under uncertain environment.

Keywords

Operational System of Systems (SoS) Command and control Adaptive planning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Numbers 71701205 and 71701206.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Yanghe Feng declares that he has no conflict of interest. Wei Shi declares that he has no conflict of interest. Wei Shi declares that he has no conflict of interest. Guangquan Cheng declares that he has no conflict of interest. Jincai Huang declares that he has no conflict of interest. Zhong Liu declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Abdelsalam HM (2003) Optimization-based architecture for managing complex integrated product development project. Ph.D. dissertation, USA: Old Dominion UniversityGoogle Scholar
  2. Akellaa MR, Battaa R, Sudit M et al (2008) Cellular network configuration with co-channel and adjacent-channel interference constraints. Comput Oper Res 35:3738–3757CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Alberts DS, Hayes RE (2003) Power to the edge: command control in the information age. United States: command and control research program publications, 2003Google Scholar
  4. Barr J, Nobuyuki H (2008) Organizations undertaking complex projects in uncertain environments. J Econ Interact Coord 3(2):119–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butterfield ML, Pearlman JS et al (2008) A system-of-systems engineering GEOSS: architectural approach. IEEE Syst J 2(3):321–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carley KM (1995) Computational and mathematical organization theory: perspective and directions. Comput Math Organ Theory 1(1):39–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carley KM, Krackhardt D (1999) A typology for C2 measures. In: Proceedings of the 1999 international symposium on command and control research and technology, Newport, RI. Vienna, VAGoogle Scholar
  8. Carley KM, Lin Z (1995) Organizational designs suited to high performance under stress. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 25(1):221–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carley KM, Prietula MJ (1994) Computational organization theory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  10. Carley KM, Svoboda DM (1996) Modeling organizational adaptation as a simulated annealing process. Sociol Methods Res 25(1):138–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen G, Sun P, Zhang J, Wu J (2018) Adaptive adjustment of command and control structure based on discrete firefly algorithm. Comput Eng Appl Issue 15:112–119Google Scholar
  12. Chuma H (2006) Increasing complexity and limits of organization in the microlithography industry: implications for Japanese science-based industries. Res Policy 35:393–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kemple WG, Kleinman DL, Berigan MC (1996) A2C2 initial experiment: adaptation of the joint scenario and formalization. In: Proceedings of the 1996 command & control research & technology symposium, Monterey, CA, pp 837–846Google Scholar
  14. Kleinman DL, Levchuk GM, Hutchins SG et al (2003) Scenario design for the empirical testing of organizational congruence. In: International command and control research and technology symposium, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. Krackhardt D, Carley KM (1998) A PCANS model of structure in organization. In: Proceedings of the 1998 international symposium on command and control research and technology, pp 113–119Google Scholar
  16. Levchuk GM, Levchuk YN, Luo J, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2002a) Normative design of organizations i: mission planning. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 32(3):346–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Levchuk GM, Levchuk YN, Luo J, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2002b) Normative design of organizations ii: organizational structure. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 32(3):360–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Levchuk GM, Kleinman DL, Sui R et al (2003) Congruence of human organizations and missions: theory versus data. In: International command and control research and technology symposium, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Levchuk GM, Levchuk YN, Luo J, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2004) Normative design of project-based organizations—part III: modeling congruent, robust, and adaptive organizations. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 34(3):337–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin Z (2006) Environmental determination or organizational design: an exploration of organizational decision making under environmental uncertainty. Simul Model Pract Theory 14(4):438–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu Z, Yang DS, Wen D, Zhang WM, Mao WJ Cyber-physical-social systems for command and control. IEEE Intell Syst (in press)Google Scholar
  22. Meirina C, Levchuk YN, Levchuk GM, Pattipati KR (2008) A Markov decision problem approach to goal attainment. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 38(1):116–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Meyer M, Zaggl MA, Carley KM (2011) Measuring CMOT’s intellectual structure and its development. Comput Math Organ Theory 17(1):1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mishraa N, Prakashb MK, Shankar R et al (2005) Hybrid tabu-simulated annealing based approach to solve multi-constraint product mix decision problem. Expert Syst Appl 29:446–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pedamallu CS, Ozdamar L (2008) Investigating a hybrid simulated annealing and local search algorithm for constrained optimization. Eur J Oper Res 185:1230–1245MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Qian M, Liu Z, Wang J, Yao L, Zhang WM (2010) Coordination-theoretic approach to modeling grid service composition process. J Syst Eng Electron 21(4):713–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rajan RG, Wulf J (2006) The flattening firm: evidence from panel data on the changing nature of corporate hierarchies. Rev Econ Stat 88(4):759–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sun Y, Yao P, Li M, Li F (2016) Adaptive adjusting method of command and control structure of army organization. Syst Eng Electron Technol 38(9):2086–2092Google Scholar
  29. Sun P, Wu J, Chen G, Zhang J (2018) Adaptive adjustment of command and control structure based on artificial bee colony algorithm. Comput Appl Res 1060:012055Google Scholar
  30. Thomas A, Turner T, Soderlund S (2009) Net-centric adapter for legacy systems. IEEE Syst J 3(3):336–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xiu BX (2006) Design methodology of C2 organizational structure and its analysis of robustness and adaptively. Ph.D. dissertation, National University of Defense Technology, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  32. Yu F, Tu F, Pattipati KR (2006) A novel congruent organizational design methodology using group technology and a nested genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 36(1):5–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanghe Feng
    • 1
    Email author
  • Wei Shi
    • 1
  • Wei Shi
    • 2
  • Guangquan Cheng
    • 1
  • Jincai Huang
    • 1
  • Zhong Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.College of System EngineeringNational University of Defense TechnologyChangshaChina
  2. 2.Center for Assessment and Demonstration ResearchBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations