SUO Planning & Decision Aids
Austin Tate, John Levine, Peter Jarvis, Jeff Dalton,
AIAI, University of Edinburgh
David Wilkins, Tom Lee, SRI International
Pete Haglich, ISX (for SRI)
• Capability to generate, refine, select, communicate,
execute and repair plans across multiple echelons
from company level to platoon and squad level.
• Two examples of Planning & Decision Aid use:
– one offensive (MOUT);
– one defensive (Halt an Attack in Restrictive
Terrain).
SUO/PDA Preliminary Workplan
Dec98--->Mar99 Apr99----------->Jun99 Jul99------------->Dec99 Jan00--->Mar00
Phase 1: Familiarization
& Domain Modeling
Phase 2: Demo Storyboard,
Concept Proofs & Further
Domain Modeling
Phase 3: System Adaptation
& Demo Production
Phase 4: Transfer
Of Results
Basic Planning Techniques
The underlying plan representations
must be done correctly to support the
desired command and control loop
Planner
Plans are doctrinally
correct and of uniform
high quality
Plan:Actions&Constraints
Situation
Resources
Constraints
SOPs
Objectives
Advice
Rapidly respond to events, changing
actions and reallocating resources,
comms. to other echelons if necessary
Actions
System Monitor
working with the
Commander
Soldiers and
Sensors in the Field
(Apply SOPs)
Potential Technical Contributions to Draw On
 Overall management of the command, planning
and control process steps to improve
coordination.
 Situation dependent option filtering (sometimes
reducing the choices normally open to one
“obvious” one [Klein p.17-18].
 Satisficing search to find the first suitable plan
that meets the essential criteria [Klein p. 20].
 Anytime algorithms which seek to improve on the
best previous solution if time permits.
 Expansion of a high level abstract plan into
greater detail where necessary.
Potential Technical Contributions to Draw On
 High level “chunks” of procedural knowledge
(SOP, TTP) at a human scale [Klein p. 52].
 Retain a high level overview. [Klein, p.227]
“Include only the detail necessary to establish a plan is possible – do not
fall into the trap of choreographing each of their movements”].
 Analysis of potential interactions as plans are
expanded or developed [Klein p 53].
 Identification of problems, flaws and issues with
the plan [Klein p. 63 & 71].
 Establishment of a space of alternative options
based on different assumptions [Klein p. 23].
 Monitoring of the execution of events as they are
expected to happen within the plan, watching for
deviations (often ahead of problem) [Klein p. 32].
Potential Technical Contributions to Draw On
 AI planning techniques represent the dynamic state
of the world at points in the plan and can be used
for “mental simulation” of the plan [Klein p. 45].
 Pruning of choices according to given requirements
or constraints [Klein p. 94 “singular strategy”].
 Heuristic evaluation and prioritisation of multiple
possible choices within the constraint search space
[Klein p. 94].
 Repair of plans while respecting plan structure and
intentions.
 Uniform use of a common plan representation with
embedded rationale to improve plan quality, shared
understanding, etc.
Long-term Contributions of PDA to the Soldier
• Shared plan representations cognisant of military principles,
doctrine, SOPs and TTPs. Makes possible:
• Doctrinally correct plans usable by everyone.
• Fast generation of multiple distinct COAs, including ones the
commander may not have considered.
• Support commander creativity through human guidance.
• Uniformly high plan quality, even during high-stress crises.
• Continuous analysis of the plan using multiple metrics.
• Monitor plan execution and respond quickly to events,
helping the commander modify the plan appropriately.
• Provide relevant information to other echelons, allowing fast
communication while preserving bandwidth.
Technical Contributions by SRI/AIAI to SUO
• Contribution to the representation of shared objectives, plans,
processes, SOPs and TTPs in SUO.
• Generation of multiple qualitatively distinct alternative COAs
dependent upon alternative assumptions and advice about the
situation.
• Support for mixed-initiative incremental plan development,
manipulation and use.
• Situation-dependant plan repair as situation changes.
• Systems integration framework for modular planning and
plan analysis systems.
• Management of planning and execution process - promotion
of intelligent process management and workflow concepts.
SUO/PDA Input to SUO/SAS Program
• Aim is to communicate and transfer some of the
relevant results of the ARPI/PDA work to SUO.
• To do this by joining in the SUO Community and
understanding its requirements.
• To demonstrate some appropriate and relevant
Advanced Planning & Decision Aids Technology.
• To be helpful to the contracting team(s).
• AIAI/SRI want to act as a conduit to the work of
others where they can see its potential relevance.
Context wrt FM 7-10 & FM 7-20 Processes
• FM 7-20 The Infantry Battalion, FM 7-10 The Infantry Rifle
Company and FM 7-8 The Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad Command and Control - Augmented by Respective Military
Training Plans (MTPs)
• Suggested as a point of comparison by Jim Madden, IDA
• Context of diagram is an overall process involving perhaps
several COAs and a command, planning, communication,
execution and control process.
• Diagram covers core part from FM 7-10 of situation
assessment and COA generation (relevant to SUO/SAS and
SUO/PDA activities)
Conduct METT-T Analysis
Mission (Assigned)
• Next higher commanders concept of operations and intent?
• Subunit tasks
• Unit tasks
- Specified?
- Implied?
• Limitations?
Receive
Mission
Formulate Assumptions & Deductions
• What is the unit’s purpose within
the higher commander’s intent?
• Which tasks allow the unit to
accomplish its purpose?
• What are the enemy’s most
probable courses of action give
the terrain and his probable
objectives?
• Where will contact first occur and
how will enemy be arrayed?
• What are probably enemy
weaknesses and vulnerabilities?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Enemy
Composition?
Disposition?
Strength?
Significant activities?
Peculiarities and weaknesses?
Enemy capabilities?
Enemy probable courses of action?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Terrain/Weather Analysis
Obstacles?
Avenues of approach?
Key terrain?
Observation and fields of fire?
Cover and concealment?
Weather?
Other characteristics?
• How do terrain/weather factors
affect the soldiers/subunits?
• How do terrain/weather factors
effect placement of weapons?
• Where can commander focus his
combat power to accomplish his
mission?
•
•
•
•
•
Troops
Composition?
Disposition?
Strength?
Significant activities?
Peculiarities and weaknesses?
•How can unit’s strength be
focused on enemy weaknesses?
•How can commander make his
best use of is combat power given
the current status of his units?
Time Available
• LD time/Defend no later time?
• Time to begin movement?
• Time available to plan?
• Time available to prepare?
• Time available to rehearse?
• Time available for reconnaissance?
Develop Course of Action
Determine the decisive point where the
enemy is most vulnerable. Ideally, where
an enemy weakness is or where the enemy
will be positioned at a time when the
battalion can generate overwhelming
combat power against the enemy
Determine what supporting efforts are
needed by asking the question, “What else
must be done to allow the main effort to
succeed?”
Determine purposes to be achieved by
main and supporting efforts by linking the
the main effort’s purpose directly to the
battalion’s purpose and the supporting efforts’
purposes directly to the main purpose
Determine essential task(s) for subordinate
units (main and supporting efforts) to achieve
the purposes stated above
Identify
type
of forces
required
to
Determine
essential
task(s)
for subordinate
accomplish
thesupporting
mission, considering
only
units (main and
efforts) to achieve
organic
and attached
units. Weigh the main
the purposes
stated above
effort; take more risk in non-main effort areas
(economy of force) Do not consider assets
such as CAS or FRASCAM, which may be
unavailable during execution.
Assign control measures to clarify responsibilities and synchronize the efforts of
subordinates to support the main effort. Allow
as much freedom of effort as possible
What are the critical time aspects
of the operation?
Prepare a COA statement and sketch to
enhance clarity. The sketch should show the3
maneuver aspects of the COA
Opportunities for PDA Support in SUO
Overall Process from Receipt of Mission to Success
In Advance
Deliberative
Planning &
Rehearsal
En-route
Rehearsal &
Replanning
During Mission
After Action
Low Tempo
Adaptation &
Plan Repair
High Tempo
Monitoring &
Plan Selection
After Action
Planning &
Support
More Detailed Slides
If Required
ARPI/PDA Goal, Themes & Participants
GOAL: Develop, demonstrate, and transition advanced knowledge-based
technology for automatic and interactive planning, scheduling, and decision
making to allow better, faster planning in complex, stressed situations
ARPI
DARPA
Planning Under
Uncertainty
Brown
University
Rockwell Int’l
U Washington
U Wisconsin
Workflow
Management &
Process Control
ISTI
U. Edinburgh
MCC
UCLA
Integrated
Planning &
Scheduling
Case-Based
Planning
CMU
ISX
Kestrel
CMU
Arizona St.
University
MITRE
Modeling
Simulation
& Evaluation
KB Planning
Systems
U. Mass
U. Edinburgh
Northwestern
University
Representation
& Intelligent KB
USC/ISI
SRI
GE CRD
U. Rochester
Loral
U. Maryland
U Oregon
BBN
Klein
Honeywell
SUO Planning & Decision Aids
SUO/PDA Objective
Demonstrate capability to generate, refine,
select, communicate, execute and repair plans
across multiple echelons from company level to
platoon and squad level relevant to SUO/SAS
environment.
Two examples of COA plan generation and use:
- one offensive (MOUT);
- one defensive (Halt an Attack in Restrictive
Terrain).
Advanced Planning Technology
•
•
Use results of DARPA/AFRL Planning Initiative (ARPI)
and Planning & Decision Aids (PDA) work
Multi-Agent Planning Architecture (MPA) and O-Plan
Systems Integration Architecture
•
SIPE-2 and O-Plan Generative Planners
•
Mixed Initiative Planning Aids
•
Planning Domain Knowledge Acquisition Tools/Editors
•
Plan Repair Algorithms
•
Planning Process Panels
•
Rich Shared Plan Representations
Schedule
• 1QCY99 - Domain familiarization. Domain modeling. Create initial
plan and activity templates for offensive and defensive scenarios.
• 2QCY99 - SUO Scenario and storyboard/demo script
development. Walk through of technology requirements,
mockup of non-working parts. Produce demo script and
scenarios.
• 3QCY99 - Technology and demonstration development first pass,
mock demonstration.
• 4QCY99 - Full demonstration development.
• 1QCY00 - Transition and communication of results to SUO
contractor. Refinement of demonstration and technology.
Integration of further modules to support more effective
demonstrations.
SUO/PDA Provisional Coordination Plan
Agreed with ITT/SRI Contracting Team
• 1-Jul-99 Kick-off with delivery of SUO/PDA AIAI Phase 2
Report
• 30-Sep-99 Comments on scenario from ITT/SRI to SUO/PDA,
agreement on SUO/SAS state descriptions used in scenario
• 31-Dec-99 SUO/PDA Demonstration
• 1-Jan-00 Technology Transfer Phase - Joint Work
• 31-Mar-00 ITT/SRI Team show link between SUO/SAS and
SUO/PDA Demonstration.
• ------------- end of current SUO/PDA project -----------------• 1-Jan-00 Possible start on SUO/PDA Phase 3 Option
• 31-Dec-00 ITT/SRI SUO/PDA Deliverable
• 30-Jun-01 End of SUO Technology Transfer Phase
SUO/PDA Preliminary Systems Sketch
Knowledge Acquisition Stage
Modeller or
Knowledge
Engineer
Army CALL Bulletins
Doctrine, SOP, TTP
Subject Matter Experts
Process Modelling
Methods
& Tools
Domain Model
Activity
Templates &
Constraints
Echelon N-1
Planning &
Execution
System
OPORD
FRAGO
Platoon Level
OPORD
FRAGO
Echelon N
Other
Modules
Planning
Related
Modules
Echelon N+1
Other
Modules
Planning
Related
Modules
Fire Team Level
Reports
Echelon N
Planning &
Execution
System
Domain Model
Activity
Templates &
Constraints
Echelon N-1
Planning
Related
Modules
Company Level
SUO/PDA Preliminary Systems Sketch
Planning & Decision Aids Use Stage
Reports
Echelon N+1
Planning &
Execution
System
SUO/PDA Preliminary System Sketch
Instantiation of Components
Echelon N-1
Planning &
Execution
System
OPORD
FRAGO
Echelon N
Other
Modules
Planning
Related
Modules
Platoon Level
Echelon N+1
Other
Modules
Planning
Related
Modules
Fire Team Level
E.g., Act Editor, CPF
OPORD
FRAGO
Echelon N-1
Planning
Related
Modules
Reports
Echelon N
Planning &
Execution
System
Domain Model
Activity
Templates &
Constraints
E.g., ModSAF, Sextant,
Blue/Red Force Laydown
Company Level
E.g., MPA, SIPE-2, O-Plan, ACP3
Reports
Echelon N+1
Planning &
Execution
System
E.g., Web O-Plan, O-P3
E.g., Plan Sketch Tool
Example of SRI ARPI/PDA Work
Giving Advice to a Planner
State of
the World
Heuristic search algorithm
Commander’s
 plans quickly
Guidance
 maintains all constraints
SIPE-2 Planner
Objective
s
Advice
PLAN: Action Structure
Actions One
Might Take
Beliefs,
Resources,
Constraints
Operators
Goals
Actions
SIPE-2
Execution Monitor
and Replanner
Integrating human judgement fixes many shortcomings of
automated planning technology
Advice:
 qualitatively different COAs
 “directed” search of options
Example of AIAI ARPI/PDA Work
Edinburgh O-Plan Project
CONCEPT
COA-1
COA-2
NEW IDEAS
Planning Workflow
Option: COA-2
Phase: Deployment
Criteria 1
Criteria 2
Criteria 3
World
View
...
...
Order Issued: ..
Option COA-2
Authority: ...
Plan View
Task Direction
& Plan Analysis
Plan Development
& Refinement
Task
Assigner
• Using domain constraints to support the
coordinated development of plans.
• Communication between users acting as Task
Assigner and Planner.
• Intelligent workflow model of planning based
on “issue” handling (agenda/to-do list).
• Simplified planner interfaces to allow ”plug
and plan” component integration.
Planner
IMPACT
• Generation of multiple qualitatively distinct
alternative COAs dependent upon alternative
assumptions concerning the emerging crisis.
• Support for mixed-initiative incremental plan
development, manipulation and use.
• Promotion of intelligent process management
and workflow concepts.
• Integration framework for large-scale modular
planning systems.
• Contribution to shared plan representations.
• Uniform manipulation of plans as a set of
constraints (<I-N-OVA> model).
MILESTONES (1996-98)
Q4/Y1 • MIP Demonstration in Pacifica NEO
• Initial Evaluation Matrix
• Demonstration scenario development
Q4/Y2 •
•
•
•
Workflow Planning Aid Experiments
TIE with Rochester on Tasking
Release of O-Plan Version 3.1
Evaluation Experiments Interim Report
Q4/Y3 •
•
•
•
Mixed Initiative Planning Demo.
TIE with USC/ISI on plan evaluation
Release of O-Plan Version 3.2
Final Evaluation Report