• Dean S. HartleyIII
Part of the Understanding Complex Systems book series (UCS)


An ontology of unconventional conflict supports the understanding of unconventional conflict in general. It also provides a tool for understanding and investigating a particular unconventional conflict. Such an ontology does these things by providing a structure that exposes the things that are known about unconventional conflict and the relationships among these things. And it exposes significant things that are not known.


  1. Arp, R., Smith, B., & Spear, A. D. (2015). Building ontologies with basic formal ontology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2011). Joint operations, joint publication 3-0. Washington, DC: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.Google Scholar
  3. Clausewitz, C. v. (1993). On war. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  4. Cycorp. (2016). An introductory walk through ontology development. Retrieved November 13, 2016, from Cycorp:
  5. Department of Defense. (2009, September 16)., 3000.05. Retrieved April 24, 2016, from DoD Issuances:
  6. Department of Defense. (2014, August 28)., 3000.07. Retrieved April 24, 2016, from DoD Issuances:
  7. DoD Chief Information Officer. (2010). DM2- DoDAF meta-model. Retrieved August 23, 2017, from DoDAF:
  8. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (2017). Dublin core metadata element set, Version 1.1. Retrieved August 23, 2017, from Metadata Innovation:
  9. Fensel, D. (2004). Ontologies: A silver bullet for knowledge management and electronic commerce (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flynn, M. T., & Ledeen, M. (2016). The field of fight. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2), 199–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hartley, D. S. (2015). DIME/PMESII models. In P. V. Fellman, Y. Bar-Yam, & A. A. Minai (Eds.), Conflict and complexity: Countering terrorism, insurgency, ethnic and regional violence (pp. 111–136). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Hartley, D. S. (2017). Unconventional conflict: A modeling perspective. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haut, D. G. (1994). OOTW. (D. S. Hartley, Interviewer).Google Scholar
  15. Haut, D. G. (1995). Progress in computer-assisted training simulations for lesser regional contingencies. JUORS VII, 28 November–1 December 1995. Tokyo.Google Scholar
  16. Hawkins, J., & Blakeslee, S. (2004). On intelligence. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin.Google Scholar
  17. Horrocks, I. (2010, June). A formal foundation for ontology languages and tools, part 1: Languages. University of Oxford Department of Computer Science. Retrieved August 27, 2017, from Description Logic:
  18. IFOMIS. (2017, March 31). BFO basic formal ontology. Retrieved August 24, 2017, from BFO Basic Formal Ontology:
  19. Lacy, L. W. (2005). OWL: Representing information using the web ontology language. Victoria, BC: Trafford.Google Scholar
  20. Onto-Med. (2010). Ontologies. Retrieved August 23, 2017, from Ontologies in Medicine:
  21. Smith, B., et al. (n.d.). Basic formal ontology 2.0: Specification and user’s guide. Retrieved August 24, 2017, from
  22. Wikipedia. (2016a, May 26). CycL. Retrieved November 12, 2016, from Wikipedia:
  23. Wikipedia. (2016b, July 6). Ontology (information science). Retrieved July 6, 2016, from Wikipedia:
  24. Wikipedia. (2017e, July 28). Type theory. Retrieved August 28, 2017, from

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dean S. HartleyIII
    • 1
  1. 1.Hartley ConsultingOak RidgeUSA

Personalised recommendations