O-PLAN TEAM WORKING DOCUMENT

SUO PDA – Scenario Brain Storming meeting April 27^th.

Austin, Jeff, JohnL, PAJ.

POSSIBLE APPLICATION BENEFITS:

Based on the simple JAVA applets

1. By following the execution of a plan, a system can present commanders advice related to the action current being executed. Austin noted that it could also explain why an action is present.
2. A tool could assist in coordination between units by suggesting that the execution of a given action does not commence as its prerequisites are not in place. For example, the team providing cover fire is not in position.
3. A plan repair tool where the user inputs the situation and is given a number of weighted options for repair in current specific situation.

SCENARIO TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

1. It was agreed that every scenario proposal would have a technical feasibility statement written that would include the results of some experimentation.

CLASSES OF EVENT THAT WOULD REQUIRE A PLAN TO BE REPAIRED

1. Plan action failure. The execution of an action did not produce its expected effects.
2. Unexpected world situation: A subset of the assumptions about the world state under which the current plan has been developed prove invalid.

TAXONOMY OF PLAN FAILURES

Divided into three levels:

Coordinated Re planning and repair (Commander)

The commander will devise plan repair and complete or partial re-plans for situations that a platoon leader cannot resolve with the authority, resource, and time limits available to him.

Consider the commander as performing the following:

• Resource balancing and re balancing. For example, committing reserve forces.
• Reallocation of resources and objectives

Localized Plan repair (Platoon leader)

We developed a taxonomy of situations that can lead to plain failures. We expect that a platoon leader would consider countering an instance of these exceptions with the resources currently available to him and within the time limits of his platoon's current operation. It is only when this is not possible that the Platoon leader would seek advice from a higher echelon. The platoon leader would also seek advice from a high echelon if he encounters an exception for which all instances must be reported.

Unexpected Positive

• Discovery of a artifact useful in the current mission
  • Sledgehammer, bulldozer, Petroleum Oil and Lubricants (POL).
  • Documents
• Absence of enemy or obstacle
  • Planned enemy or obstacle not present (enemy's absence could also be negative)

Unexpected Negative

• Unexpected encounter with enemy or obstacle
  • Booby traps
  • (unexpected) Enemy fire
• Equipment
  • Equipment degradation or failure

Action selected with reference to situation (Squad leader)

Characterized by a situated action reactive agent system such as PRS. Models the training on which soldiers will fall back on in order to react to a situation. Trivial example, if your getting shot at take cover. Such a system would need to rule out general responses that are not appropriate in the current situation.

Axis along which the SUO scenarios vary

Operation San Roberto

This operates over a realtively small geographical area with an enemy in a fixed postion. View this as a single planning decision at the Company level and above with lots of planning at the Platoon level and below. This is more a situated action domain.

Operation Other one

This opeates over a realatively large geographical area with a moving enemy. View this as multiple planning decisions at Company level and above. Less decision making at Platoon level and below.