Location of Repository

Collaborative Operations for Personnel Recovery Final Report on DARPA/AFRL

By Austin Tate, J Dalton, J Stader, G Wickler and J Hansberger

Abstract

The University of Edinburgh and research sponsors are authorised to reproduce and distribute reprints and on-line copies for their purposes notwithstanding any copyright annotation hereon. The views and conclusions contained herein are the author’s and shouldn’t be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of other parties.The Collaborative Operations for Personnel Recovery (Co-OPR) project sought to\ud provide collaborative task support for a Search and Rescue coordination center. The\ud project aimed to create a prototype “Personnel Recovery (Experimental) Pack” (PREP) and to demonstrate its use.\ud \ud A number of requirements capture, knowledge gathering and transition workshops and\ud meetings were held. This included an initial requirements setting workshop early in 2005,\ud meetings at the USJFCOM Joint Personnel Recovery Agency’s (JPRA) Personnel\ud Recovery Education and Training Center (PRETC) in Fredericksburg, Virginia in June\ud 2005, a review meeting in Edinburgh in August 2005, and attendance at a Command Post\ud Exercise (CPX) at the PRETC in November 2005. These initially established the potential\ud areas for use of Co-OPR and I-X tools in training exercises. In the second project year such tools were developed and tested using a training exercise as held at the PRETC, using observers from PRETC and USJFCOM and an evaluation expert from USJFCOM/J9.\ud \ud The project was provided with a rich set of urban and rural scenarios by JPRA/PRETC\ud which together are unclassified versions of scenarios used within the PRETC training\ud courses and Command Post Exercises. At the time, these stretched the capabilities of the\ud current and envisaged technologies within Co-OPR/I-X. Refinement of the scenarios\ud alongside PRETC, and knowledge engineering to capture information on standard operating procedures and responses were a key part of making the work relevant to the potential real use of Co-OPR/I-X for Personnel Recovery.\ud \ud The core I-X technology was packaged into a number of checkpoint releases to make\ud available the features required to meet the application needs. I-X version 4.3 released in November 2005 to checkpoint the results achieved on the first 12 months of work with\ud the PRETC. It formed a basis for the work on really using the technology at the PRETC.\ud New “white cell” aids for training were made available in an initial version. A new I-Sim\ud simulation capability, and advanced option exploration tools have all been improved\ud significantly to make them more usable, including the features of the I-Plan AI planner and its capability for plan repair after failures. The features of the Domain Editor (I-DE) and its ability to browse and update or augment standard operating procedure knowledge dynamically during missions were enhanced. The final release of I-X that includes all the new developments achieved in the Co-OPR project is version 4.5.\ud \ud The results of the work were packaged, along with Personnel Recovery domain specific\ud models, as a web site and/or CD which could be considered as a prototype “Personnel\ud Recovery (Experimental) Pack” of tools to assist a Joint Personnel Recovery Center\ud (JPRC) and associated operational staff in performing their operations. The versions of\ud PREP produced were used in one workshop or Command Post Exercise at the PRETC\ud under guidance from Dr. Jeff Hansberger at training related workshops already organized\ud by USJFCOM/J9 Expt. and Fred Kleibacker, the (now former) Director of the PRETC in\ud Fredericksburg, Virginia. Co-OPR team members were engaged with these workshops to\ud to show the tools in realistic settings, to assist with training where possible, and to gather experimental feedback.\ud \ud Realistic use of tools for Personnel Recovery requires that the systems can work with\ud emerging technology for geo-positioning, survival radios, evasion aids, robotic or semiautomated rescue aids or robots, and doctrine or tactics, techniques and procedures for Personnel Recovery. A number of short studies of these “complementary technologies” were made which explored deployment and inter-working aspects of these with the Co-OPR/I-X technology

Topics: artificial intelligence, Computer Science, personnel recovery, I-X technology, search and rescue, Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute
Publisher: Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute
Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk:1842/2164

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1999). A Common Process Ontology for Process-Centred Organisations, Knowledge based Systems,
  2. (2003). An Ontology for Mixed-initiative Synthesis Tasks.
  3. (2004). Automated Planning – Theory and Practice, chapter 11. doi
  4. (2006). Co-OPR: Design and Evaluation of Collaborative Sensemaking and Planning Tools for Personnel Recovery,
  5. (2002). Coalition Agents Experiment: Multi-Agent Cooperation doi
  6. (2003). Concept Mapping Between Compendium and I-X, Informatics Report Series,
  7. (1991). Design space analysis: Bridging from theory to practice via design rationale.
  8. (2003). Dialog Mapping: Reflections on an Industrial Strength Case Study. In: doi
  9. (1981). Force Management Decision Requirements for Air Force Tactical Command and Control. doi
  10. (1977). Generating Project Networks. .
  11. (1988). gIBIS: A hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. doi
  12. (1995). How A Cockpit Remembers its Speeds. doi
  13. (1990). Human Error. doi
  14. (2005). Human performance modeling for operational command, control, and communication. doi
  15. (1991). Hypermedia Support for Argumentation-Based Rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC. In: Rationale Management in Software Engineering (Eds.) doi
  16. (2000). I-N-OVA> and - Representing Plans and other Synthesized Artifacts as a Set of Constraints”,
  17. (2002). I-P2- Intelligent Process Panels to Support Coalition Operations.
  18. (1995). Integrating Constraint Management into an AI Planner. doi
  19. (2000). Intelligible AI Planning”, doi
  20. (2006). Jabber: Open Instant Messaging and a Whole Lot More, Powered by XMPP. http://www.jabber.org/
  21. (2003). KAoS policy and domain services: Toward a description- 51 logic approach to policy representation, deconfliction, and enforcement. doi
  22. (2003). KAoS policy and domain services: Toward a description51 logic approach to policy representation, deconfliction, and enforcement. doi
  23. (2004). Making agents acceptable to people. In doi
  24. (2000). O-Plan: a Web-based AI Planning Agent”, AAAI2000 Intelligent Systems Demonstrator,
  25. (1991). O-Plan: the Open Planning Architecture. doi
  26. (2003). OpenMap™ Open Systems mapping Technology - http://openmap.bbn.com
  27. (1994). OPIS: A methodology and architecture for reactive scheduling.
  28. (1994). OPIS: A methodology and architecture for reactive scheduling. In
  29. (2000). Ponder: A Language for Specifying Security and Management Policies for Distributed Systems, Version 2.3. doi
  30. (1998). Rationale in Planning: Causality, Dependencies and Decisions. doi
  31. (2003). Representation and reasoning for DAML-based policy and domain services in KAoS and Nomads. doi
  32. (1998). Roots of SPAR, doi
  33. (2006). Science Strategy and War, The Strategic Theory of doi
  34. (2001). Semantic Web Services. doi
  35. (1993). Sharing To-Do Lists with a Distributed Task Manager. In: doi
  36. (1993). Sharing To-Do Lists with a Distributed Task Manager. In: de Michelis doi
  37. (1999). Supporting Collaborative Analysis and Design with Hypertext Functionality,
  38. (2001). Task Achieving Agents on the World Wide Web”,
  39. (2003). The Coalition Agents Experiment: doi
  40. (1996). The Constraint Model of Plans,
  41. (1975). The Nonlinear Nature of Plans.
  42. (2000). The Process Specification Language (PSL): Overview and Version 1.0 Specification,"
  43. (2003). Transactive memory in dynamic organizations. In doi
  44. (1986). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In doi
  45. (1996). Unifying Classical Planning Approaches,
  46. (1999). Using Expressive and Flexible Action Representations to Reason about Capabilities for Intelligent Agent Cooperation.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.