Multi-Objective Constraint Satisfaction for Mobile Robot Area Defense

In developing multi-robot cooperative systems, there are often competing objectives that need to be met. For example in automating area defense systems, multiple robots must work together to explore the entire area, and maintain consistent communications to alert the other agents and ensure trust in the system. This research presents an algorithm that tasks robots to meet the two specific goals of exploration and communication maintenance in an uncoordinated environment reducing the need for a user to pre-balance the objectives. This multi-objective problem is defined as a constraint satisfaction problem solved using the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II). Both goals of exploration and communication maintenance are described as fitness functions in the algorithm that would satisfy their corresponding constraints. The exploration fitness was described in three ways to diversify the way exploration was measured, whereas the communication maintenance fitness was calculated as the number of independent clusters of agents. Applying the algorithm to the area defense problem, results show exploration and communication without coordination are two diametrically opposed goals, in which one may be favored, but only at the expense of the other. This work also presents suggestions for anyone looking to take further steps in developing a physically grounded solution to this area defense problem

Computer Aided Verification

The open access two-volume set LNCS 12224 and 12225 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 32st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2020, held in Los Angeles, CA, USA, in July 2020.* The 43 full papers presented together with 18 tool papers and 4 case studies, were carefully reviewed and selected from 240 submissions. The papers were organized in the following topical sections: Part I: AI verification; blockchain and Security; Concurrency; hardware verification and decision procedures; and hybrid and dynamic systems. Part II: model checking; software verification; stochastic systems; and synthesis. *The conference was held virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic

System of Systems Stakeholder Planning in a Multi-Stakeholder, Multi-Objective, and Uncertain Environment

The United States defense planning process is currently conducted in a partially consolidated manner driven by the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) process. Decisions to invest in technology, develop systems, and acquire assets are made by individual services with coordination at the higher joint level. These individual service’s decisions are made in an environment where resource allocation and need are influenced by external stakeholders (e.g. shared system development costs, additional levied requirements, and complementary system development). The future outcome of any given decision is subject to a high degree of uncertainty stemming from both the stakeholder execution of a decision and the environment in which that execution will take place. Uncertainty in execution stems from TRL advancement, development timelines, acquisition timelines, and final deployed performance. Environmental uncertainty factors include future stakeholder resource availability, the future threat environment, cooperative stakeholder decisions, and mirrored adversary decisions. The defense planning problem can be described as an acknowledged System of Systems (SoS) planning problem. Today, methodologies exist that individually address SoS Engineering processes, the evaluation of SoS performance, and SoS system deterministic evolution. However, few approaches holistically address the SoS planning and evolution problem at the level needed to assist individual defense stakeholders in strategic planning. Current approaches do not address the impact of multiple-stakeholder decisions, multiple goals for each stakeholder, the uncertainty of decision outcomes, and the temporal component to strategic decision making. This thesis develops and tests a methodology to address defense stakeholder planning in a multi-stakeholder, multi-objective, and uncertain environment. First, a decision space is populated and captured via sampling a game framework that represents multiple stakeholder decisions as well as decision outcomes over time. A compressed Markov Decision Process (MDP) based meta-model is constructed using state-space consolidation techniques. The meta-model is evaluated using a risk-based policy development algorithm derived from combining traditional Reinforcement Learning (RL) techniques with mean-variance portfolio theory. Policy sensitivity to stakeholder risk-tolerance levels is used to develop state-based risk-tolerance sensitivity profiles and identify Pareto efficient actions. The risk-tolerance sensitivity profiles are used to evaluate both state spaces and decision spaces to provide stakeholders with risk-based insights, or rule sets, to support immediate decision making and risk-based stakeholder playbook development. The capability of the risk-based policy algorithm is tested using both elementary and complex scenarios. It is demonstrated that the algorithm can be used to extract Pareto efficient decisions as a function of risk-tolerance. The state space compression is tested via the comparison of the loss of information between the risk-based policy solutions for uncompressed and compressed state space. The full methodology is then demonstrated using a full-complexity scenario based on the joint development by France, Germany, and Spain of the SoS based Future Combat Air System (FCAS). The full complexity scenario is used to baseline the risk-based methodology against current optimal policy solution techniques. A significant increase in resulting derived insights relative to optimal policy solutions in a high uncertainty scenario is demonstrated.Ph.D

The history of banking technologies in the UK: patterns of technological investment decision-making and expertise

The central role of banking in the 2008 credit crisis has been the source of much controversy about the quality and robustness of decision-making in the Financial Services sector. This paper aims to surface the influence of the historical evolution of expertise in the banking sector, on such decisions and, in so doing, to underline that the decision-making activity is strongly linked to the views of dominant expert groups in the industry in each era. The paper proposes that Technological Investment Decision Making (TIDM), as viewed historically, has been highly contingent to both technological developments in banking and the subsequent developments in banking expertise that provides the pool for decision-makers in the industry.The paper adopts an historical perspective to illustrate that, counter to popular belief, TIDM is a socially constructed process rather than the outcome of any normative exercise. History demonstrates that there is no optimal method for TIDM with rigour and accuracy of execution determining successful outcomes. On the contrary, in each era, the "right way" to perform TIDM has always been underpinned by the standpoints and beliefs of specialised practitioners who dominated the UK banking industry and by the received wisdom of a community of expert professionals, administrators and think tanks, dictating "realities" on the state of the economy, the role of banks and the value of technologies