Advertisement

Automation in Experimentation with Constructive Simulation

  • Jan Hodicky
  • Dalibor ProchazkaEmail author
  • Josef Prochazka
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11472)

Abstract

Today constructive simulations are used mainly to support training and education subdomain from the modelling and simulation applications portfolio as defined in the NATO Modelling and Simulation (M&S) Master Plan. Other M&S application areas, namely Support to Operations, Capability Development, Mission Rehearsal and Procurement can benefit from already implemented constructive simulations. The recommended approach is to use constructive simulation to design, execute and analyze an experiment to get insights in problems being solved in the previously mentioned M&S application areas. The first part of the article descripts the value of experimentation for the military and explains fidelity, cost and automation factors in Live, Virtual and Constructive simulation if used for experimentation purposes. Further basic building blocks of an experiment with constructive simulation are described. Starting from the scenario development block up to the analytical and customized visualization block to better fit a need of the customer of the experiment results. The second part describes the current architecture of constructive simulation and its challenges when trying to cover all the building blocks of an experiment. The common denominator of all challenges is automation. Therefore the role of human being and automata will be discussed in the context of an experiment. The last part covers the Test Case when the constructive simulation, MASA Sword, is used to demonstrate current state of the art and limitation of automation in the experimentation field.

Keywords

Automation Constructive simulation Experiment 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is sponsored by the Czech MoD project called STRATAL (2016-2020).

References

  1. 1.
    NATO ACT: NATO Modelling and Simulation Master Plan, 2nd edn (2012). AC/323/NMSG(2012)-015Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hodicky, J., Prochazka, D.: NATO modelling and simulation education and training curriculum- do we need a new NATO military discipline?. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Military Technologies (ICMT), University of Defence, Brno, pp. 700–704 (2017). ISBN 978-1-5386-1988-9Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    NATO ACT: Bi-SC 75-4. Experimentation Directive. HQ SACT, Norfolk (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fucik, J., Melichar, J., Kolkus, J., Prochazka, J.: Military technology evolution assessment under growing uncertainty and complexity: methodo-logical framework for alternative futures. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Military Technologies, pp. 682–689. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Piscataway (2017). ISBN 978-1-5386-1988-9Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drozd, J., Stodola, P., Křišťálová, D., Kozůbek, J.: Experiments with the UAS reconnaissance model in the real environment. In: Mazal, J. (ed.) MESAS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10756, pp. 340–349. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76072-8_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stodola, P., Mazal, J.: Model of optimal cooperative reconnaissance and its solution using metaheuristic methods. Defence Sci. J. 67(5), 529–535 (2017). ISSN 0011-748XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stodola, P.: Improvement in the model of cooperative aerial reconnaissance used in the tactical decision support system. J. Defense Model. Simul. 14(4), 483–492 (2017). ISSN 1548-5129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stodola, P., Nohel, J., Mazal, J.: Model of optimal maneuver used in tactical decision support system. In: Methods and Models in Automation & Robotics (MMAR 2016), pp. 1240–1245. West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, Mezizdroje (2016). ISBN 978-150901866-6.1Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farlik, J., Tesar, F.: Aspects of the surface-to-air missile systems modelling and simulation. In: Mazal, J. (ed.) MESAS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10756, pp. 324–339. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76072-8_23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farlik, J.: Conceptual operational architecture of the air force simulator: simulation of air defense operations. In: 2015 International Conference on Military Technologies ICMT (2015). Article no. 7153723Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hurt, T., McKelvy, T., McDonnell, J.: The modeling architecture for technology, research, and experimentation. In: Proceedings Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 1261–1265 (2006). Article no. 4117746Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hodson, D., Baldwin, R.: Characterizing, measuring, and validating the temporal consistency of Live—Virtual constructive environments. Simulation 85(10), 671–682 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lutz, R., Drake, D.: Gateway concepts for enhanced LVC interoperability. In: 2011 Spring Simulation Interoperability Workshop 2011, Spring SIW, pp. 113–119 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hodicky, J.: Autonomous systems operationalization gaps overcome by modelling and simulation. In: Hodicky, J. (ed.) MESAS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9991, pp. 40–47. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47605-6_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maran, N.J., Glavin, R.J.: Low- to high-fidelity simulation - a continuum of medical education? Med. Educ. Suppl. 37(1), 22–28 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vysocky, A., Novak, P.: Human – robot collaboration in industry. MM Sci. J. 2016(02), 903--906 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.17973/mmsj.2016_06_201611. ISSN 18031269. Accessed 24 May 2018
  17. 17.
    Lazna, T., Gabrlik, P., Jilek, T., Zalud, L.: Cooperation between an unmanned aerial vehicle and an unmanned ground vehicle in highly accurate localization of gamma radiation hotspots. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 15(1) (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1729881417750787
  18. 18.
    Guide for understanding and implementing defense experimentation (GUIDEx). The Technical Cooperation Programme (TTCP), pp. 1--388 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wohlin, C., et al.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, London (2012). ISBN 978-3-642-29043-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Hodicky
    • 1
  • Dalibor Prochazka
    • 1
    Email author
  • Josef Prochazka
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for the Security and Military Strategic StudiesUniversity of DefenseBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations