simulating sensemaking process with microsaint€¦ · presentation outline 1.introduction: define...

2006 ICCRTS, De Vere university Arms, Cambridge, UK. June 22, 2006

NORTH CAROLINA A&T STATE UNIVERSITY

SIMULATING SENSEMAKING PROCESS WITH MICROSAINT

Professor Celestine A. Ntuen, Ph.DDistinguished University ProfessorThe Army Center for Human-Centric C2 Decision [email protected]://gandalf.ncat.edu/ihms+1-336-334-7780 (X531): phone+1-336-334-7729: fax

mailto:[email protected]

http://gandalf.ncat.edu/ihms


Presentation Outline

1. INTRODUCTION: Define Sensemaking/ Occasions for SM

2.COGNITIVE DIMENSIONS OF SM3.SM MODELLING PROBLEMS4.SOME EXISTING SM MODELING

SYSTEMS5.BUILDING A SIMULATION MODEL FOR

SM6.MODELING SM WITH MICROSAINT

NETWORK 7.RESULTS/ CONCLUSIONS/

EXTENSIONS2006 ICCRTS, De Vere university Arms, Cambridge, UK. June 22, 2006


Sensemaking: A process, design, or techniques of fusing information in context to derive understanding.

Making Sense: The art or science of making meaning and/ or interpreting information in context fordecision making.

WHAT IS SENSEMAKING ?



Some Sensemaking Definitions

1. HOW MEANING IS CONSTRUCTED AT BOTH THE INDIVIDUAL & THE GROUP LEVELS – (Weick, 1995).

2. A SYSTEM OF ACTIONS, SYMBOLS AND PROCESSES THAT ENABLES AN ORGANIZATION TO TRANSFORM INFORMATION INTO VALUED KNOWLEDGE WHICH INTURN INCREASES ITS LONG-RUN ADAPTIVE CAPACITY – (Schandt, 1997; pp. 8)




3. A THEORY AND A PROCESS OF HOW PEOPLE REDUCE UNCERTAINTY OR AMBIGUITY; SOCIALLY NEGOTIATE MEANING DURING DECISION MAKING

----(Weick, 1985)

4. ARTICULATING AND POSSIBLY CONTESTING THE MEANING AND SIGNIFICANCE OF AN ARTIFACT OR IDEA –(S.B. Shum & A. M. Selvin, In Distributive Collective Practices 2000: www.limsi.fr/WkG/PCD2000)


http://www.limsi.fr/WkG/PCD2000



5. COLLECTING “DOTS” and BRIDGING MEANING TO HUGE VOLUME OF DATA---INQ-Tel (Arlington-based company).

6. DERIVING MEANING FROM FRAGMENTARY CUES–(DARPA’S Information Awareness Project).



Why Sensemaking ?Situation Understanding Solution Approach

•Political•Economic•Military•Social•Information•Infrastructure

Iraqi Problems•Insurgency•Terrorism•Civil Unrest•Ethnic Rivalry•Weapon of

Mass Destruction•Despotic Leadership

Adversary Characteristics

Dynamic, Uncertain, Chaos,Complex, Novel, Ambiguous,Asymmetric Enemy

OrFriend?


http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/images/oif-map-050700.gif

Why Sensemaking ?Interpreting Commander’s Intent



Spatial dimensions of the Sensemaking Environment:the Cynfin framework (a la Leedom, 2004 )



Cognitive KnowledgeDimensions in Sensemaking



Sensemaking Process

Meaning

Interpretation

Comprehension

Understanding ExperienceTraining

Judgment

Knowledge

Information

Data

Transform,Act

Explore, Analyze, Fuse

A Team ofSensemakers

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Sensemaking Modeling Problems

1. The problem is not understood until after formulation of a solution

2. Sensmakers have different worldviews and frames for understandingthe problem

3. The problem to be solved changesover time—new & evolving behaviors

4. No formal approach—inherentlynon-linear

5. “Wicked” problems—complexity, chaos; lacks representation ontology

6. Battlespace changes dynamically according to Cynefin model:

Known Knowable Complex Chao



Cognitively: a process of collecting, filtering, interpreting, framing, and Organizing information into actionable knowledge to support decision making

Contex

t Exp

ertise

Cult

ure R

isk

Innov

ationAd

apta

tion

ProblemInformation EquivocalityChaos/Wicked problemsEvolving/unanticipated/Dynamic

SensemakingPattern recognitionClassification/detctionLink analysis/cognitivemapViewpoints

Observe

Meanin

g

Interpretation

UnderstandingOrient

Decide ActJudgment

ChoiceExe

cute

Sensemaking Loop

Decision-making Loop

COAEvaluating

Comparing

Deciding


Current Status

What


InformationManagementSupport


Current Status


InformationManagementSupport


Current Status


Lack formalAnalytical Model

1. Lacks constructive models to capture dynamics of Context and sensemakers viewpoints

2. Lacks a device to model cognitive processes(Borrow from Recognition-primed (Klein);OODA model (Boyd))

3. Lacks models to calibrate sensemaking performance(Infuse Naturalistic Decision Making (Klein)

4. Ability to capture subjective knowledge—a continuum from quasi-analytic to intuitive


Building a Simulation Model for Sensemaking


Situation

Perception

Cue Recognition:(features, patterns, sequence, etc)

Interpretation

&

Meaning association

Understanding(elaboration, mediation, comprehension, explanation, constraint relaxation)

DecisionStage

LTM

AttentionSTM

Situation Awareness /Recognition Primed/ OODA

Sensemaking StageExpert

A Suite of Theories: Kelly/ Endsley/Klein/Boyd



A CASE STDY: BLACK HOLE AIR CAMPAIGN1st Gulf War---General Blosson (rtd)

The Model Information Elements

1. A Proof-of-concept simulation model2. Describe air tasking processes through many

hierarchical constraints of C23. Interpreting command intents 4. Determining high payoff targets5. EBO based on vaguely defined concept of the

situation 6. Information equivocality : CETCOMD,

CENTAF, JCC, etc.



C2 :Experience/ Leadership/ Technology/Intel Community

InformationSpace

Mixed informationfrom Saddam

National Pride(USA)

Arab’ s SilenceSaddam’s threat

to neighbors

Situation Understanding

•Saddam’s intent•Iraqi capability•Iraqi threat to

neighbors•Impact of Kuwait

occupation•Defend of Saudi

Arabia•Defend of UAE•Reaction from Arab community

Operational Sensemaking•Force components•Center of gravity•Targets•Rules of engagement•Resources/Time/Location•Civil issues•Troop safetySaddam’s COA•Withdraw from Kuwait•Use WMD•Kill Kuwaiti civilians•Attack neighbors•Execute hostages

Political / EconomicEngagement

•United Nations•Coalition / Allies• Economic Embargo•Kuwait sovereignty

Obs

erve

Orie

nt

Decid

e

Act

COGNITIVE TASK ANALYSIS



Negotiation Campaign

(USA, allies, &United Nation(1-6 months)

Retaliatory Campaign

(USA and allies)4-10 weeks

Full war Campaign

(4-15 weeks)

Contin

ue

nego

tiatio

nFailed negotiation

Treaty implementation E

nfor

ce

Ret

alia

tion

CO

A

Upgra

deca

mpa

ign b

ased

on a

dver

se re

spon

seRed

uce

Cam

paig

n co

nditi

onsRapid

response

Renegotiation

Continue

war until

mission

is achieved

A Reduced Markov-like Network for TheaterCampaign Information

UnfoldingSituations

United Nations

USA Allies

USACitizens

AdversaryNations

Joint Chief DecomposePresident’s Guidance

Generatemeaning

Operational CommandConvert CINC guidance into

operational tasks

CINC Interpret

Decompose objectives

Concept of war

Dimensions of war

Campaign BattlestaffStrategiesCOATactical Plans

CommandIntent/guidance

Approval

Air componentobjectives

Plan OutcomeAssessment

Nominate COANominate strategyNominate assetsNominate targetsSimulate scenario

changes

SynchronizeCommon operating pictureResourcesSchedules

Feedback: approval/review

Task level

Intents &

guidance

Prioritized ATOShared information with other

Joint servicesTime, place, format, quantity, roles, etc

PresidentsGuidance

Level 1 SMLevel 2 SM

Level 3 SM

Level 4 SM


CINC Concept ofOperation

Phase 3:Battlefield

PreparationPhase 1:Strategic

Campaign

Phase 2:Air

Supremacy

Phase 4:Ground

Operation

CutSupply Line

Destroy WMD

DestroyRepublican

Guard

Attack Leadership

PrioritizeTargets

OperationCommandersTask model

Joint ChairGuidance(subject tochanges)

Concepts changesrelative to guidance

A network representation of the CINC’sconcept of operation



MICROSAINT Network Model



SAMPLE RESULTS: Distribution of planning times in weeks

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Task

Plan

tim

e in

wee

ks

UN Security Council Meeting

Cunsultation Friendly Nations

UN Deployment

Friendly deployment

Negotiate time to leave Kuwait

Intel on Iraq threaten to excutePOW Intel on Iraq plan to invadeSaudi ArabiaPresidential Guidance

Commander in Chief Guidance

Oplan: Destroy WMD

Oplan: Attrit Rep.Guard

Oplan: Destroy Leadership

Oplan: Attrit Iraq forceCapabilityOplan: Air Campaing



SAMPLE RESULTS: Phased Based planning times in weeks

0

5

10

15

20

25

Phase-1Plan

Phase-2Plan

Phase-3Plan

Phase-4Plan

Priotizetargets

RecognizeSituationChanges

Sens

emak

ing

time

in w

eeks

Series1



SAMPLE RESULTS: Battle tasks sensemaking times in weeks

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14Ex

plai

ning

guid

ance

tost

aff

Inte

rpre

ting

high

er o

rder

inte

nt

Col

lect

ive

unde

rsta

ndin

gof

ope

ratio

n

Brie

fings

Proj

ectin

gfu

ture

sta

te o

fba

ttle

Sensemaking tasks

Sens

emak

ing

time

in w

eeks

Series1


SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

Sensemaking can be considered as a judge-advisor decision support system which can be used to certify or authenticate the usefulness of situated information for action-based decision making in dynamic contexts.



SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

Major Factors:

•Complex Conditions•State changes•Universality•Preconditions

•Time•Resources

•Availability of experts (humans/machines)

•Uncertainty•Incomplete information•Randomness

•Chaos•Indeterminate states•Fractals of battle space Information

Integration

Situation Awareness

InformationAwareness

DecisionSupport System

Display &VisualizationTools

Augmented CognitionTools

Technology Tools for Operator Support

Support for situation analysis

Support of predictionand envisioning

Support for Cognitive amplification

Levels of InformationSupport&Automation-HumanInteraction


2006 CCRTS, San Diego. June 22, 2006


EXTENSIONS

•Supports sensemaking as a continuous cycle of interacting plans

•Open architecture:•Captures execution-monitoring in real-time.•Provides modules for sensemakingsimulation codes.

simulating sensemaking process with microsaint€¦ · presentation outline 1.introduction: define...

Documents