TDA documents determine the personnel strengths for each Army installation. They reflect the number of people required to accomplish a certain mission by various characteristics. U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) analysts continuously scrutinize these documents to ensure that they comply with provided guidance. Part of this guidance has been used to develop a set of manual rules. Analysts apply these rules to the TDA to eliminate positions, downgrade positions, or reduce position strength. However, this process is very time consuming. ln addition, human involvement introduces inconsistencies and errors that are difficult to detect later. This paper explains how I represented these rules using the 'C' Language Production System (CLIPS) to develop an expert system that is applied consistently and comprehensively for all TRADOC installations. The TDA System Analyzer reduces the review process from about five days to just twenty minutes; giving the user more time to analyze the results and thereby make better decisions. Furthermore, the user is assured that the rules are applied uniformly to every TDA document. This paper also explains the integration of the TDA System Analyzer into TRADOC's On-Line TDA System. Providing the analyst an extra utility module that can be accessed from a familiar environment

Mack, John F.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

N96- 12914
The Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) System Analyzer
Major John F. Mack
Artificial Intelligence Center
US Army Training and Doctrine Command
Fort Monroe, Virginia23651
Abstract
TDA documents determine the personnel strengths
for each Army installation. They reflect the number of people
requiredtoaccomplisha certain missionby variouscharac-
teristics.US Army Training and Doctrine Command
CI'RADOC) analysts continuouslyscrutinizethese docu-
ments toensurethattheycomply withprovidedguidance.
Partofthisguidancehas been usedtodevelopasetofmanual
rules. Analysts apply these rules to the TDA to: (1) eliminate
positions; (2) downgrade positions; m"(3) reduce position
strength. However, this process is very time consuming. In
addition, human involvement introduces inconsistencies and
errorsthat are difficult to detect later.
This paper explains how I represented these rules
using the 'C' Language Production System (CLIPS) to de-
velop an expert system that is applied consistently and
comprehensively for all TRAIX)C installations. The TDA
System Analyzer reduces the review process from about five
days to just twenty minutes; giving the user more time to
analyze the results and thereby make better decisions. Fur-
thermore, the user is assured that the rules are applied
uniformly to every TDA documenL
This paper also explains the integration of the "IDA
System Analyzer into TRADOC's On-Line TDA System.
Providing the analyst an extra utility module that can be
accessed from a familiar environment.
1. Introduction
Installations rarely receive the exact number of
soldiers that they request. Therefore, distributing scarce per-
sonnel resources is a problem. It will become more acute as
the Army reduces its current 764,000 active-duty force by
184,000 soldiers in the next four yeats. TRADOC, being the
Army's major headquarters for training, is responsible for
distributing its share ofpersonnelresourcesto its subordinate
installations.
This process is dynamic and complex. It involves
manually reviewing large TDA documents (some having
more than 10,000 records) for conflicts with policy, inaccu-
rate grading structures, and incorrect number of soldiers
f'dling a position. The manpower analyst must be familiar
with a variety of current and new force structures, unit
modernization options, and manpower relationships between
units and activities. At a high level, the analyst must be able
to formulate plans to distribute new personnel resources and
redistribute existing personnel. At a low level, the analyst
must track very detailed information to determine the impli-
cations on individual units while abiding with current policy.
The sheer size of the "IDA documents often forces
the analyst to spend an inordinate amount of time reviewing
the documents for inconsistencies rather than analyzing them
for policy compliance and distribution requirements. In
addition, the review process is mundane and subject to error.
These errors can adversely affect later analysis.
The purpose of the TDA System Analyzer is to
conduct the initial review of the "IDA document for the
analyst. It scrubs each document using a dynamic rule set
written in CLIPS and highlights potential inconsistencies.
The analyst concentrates only on these discrepancies; devot-
ing more time to high level analysis.
The TDA System Analyzer executes on a Zenith
248 Personal Compute, (PC) with 640 kilobytes of internal
memory and 20 megabytes of external hard disk space. The
system is an external utility module within TRADOCs On-
Line TDA System. The On-Line TDA System is a dBase
IIlTM program that brings TDA databases residing on main-
frames to manpower analysts usingPCs.
2. The Rules
In 1988, the Commanding General of TRADOC,
General Maxwell Thurman, initiated development of a rule
set to quantify the discrepancies an analyst should detect
while reviewing a "IDA document. He intended that an
expert system use these rules to relieve the analyst of the
initial review process.
The set contains two types of rules: (1) those
defining exact discrepancies in the document: and (2) those
398
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19960002905 2020-06-16T06:48:05+00:00Z
showing grading structures by position. The first type de-
scribes the conditions within the TDA document the system
searches. For example, an officer cannot work for another
officer of the same grade. If the situation exists where a
Captain works for another Captain, the system detects this
and reports a problem to the analyst.
The second type specifies the grade or rank for a
position at a certain level. For instance, a rule might state that
a Company Commander be a Captain. In this example, the
position is Commander, the level is Company and the grade
is Captain. If the system detects a Major as a Company
Commander, a discrepancy is sent to the analyst. Appendix
A provides a complete listing of the rules.
3. System Components and Design
Methodology
I used a phased control methodology as the basic
design for the TDA System Analyzer. Phase control facts are
asserted and retracted depending on the current state of
processing. Figure 1 shows the sequence of phases.
Continue until all
sub-units have been
processed
Figure 1. Sequence t)f Phases
3.1 Initialize
My re,compiled version of CLIPS receives three
parameters-the file name of the CLIPS rule set, the file name
of a dBase I1Tru database containing position grading data
(this will be discussed later), and the name of a TDA docu-
ment. The system uses the first parameter to load the rule set.
It uses the next two parameters to assert two relations. These
are (database "dBase IIr TM file name") and (process "file
name of TDA document"). The t'h-stindicates the database
that queries will be made to. The second fact tells the system
which TDA document to open for processing.
3.2 Load Unit to Process
This phase determines the type of installation that
will be analyzed. Different TRADOC installations require
different types of analysis as reflected in the corresponding
type 2 rules. For instance, the system processes a Service
School differently than a Brigade.
A dBase IIF_ database captures information about
the processing requirements for the different installations.
The information stored in this database is the u-iplet (level,
position, grade). Type 2 rules use this triplet to detect
discrepancies. This data can he thought of as system parame-
ters that can be deleted, modified, or added by the user.
When the system determines the installation type, it
queries the database for just the data it needs to review that
particular installation. An external function, ssql (Small
Structured Query Language), executes this. This function
provides direct access to dBase IIr TM data fries using a subset
of the Structured Query Language (SQL). For instance, the
following rule uses ssql to query the Grading-lnfo database
for Service School data.
(defrule get.level-service-school
(phase Ioad.UIC-to-process)
(service-schools $?service-schools)
;;; Service School IDs
(UIC ?uic&:(> (member ?uic $?service.scbools)))
;;; is this a service school
-->,
(ssql "grading-data"
"select * from Grading-lnfo where
level = service-school"))
Figure 2. Rule Calling ssql
399
ssqlassertsrelationsofthefollowingtypeinto the
knowledge base: (grading.data "level" "position"
"grade"). These facts represent the permissible grading
structures for this installation type.
3.3 Load TDA Data
TDA documents can contain more than 10,000 rec-
ords. It is impractical to reason about all 10,000 records
concurrently. Therefore, the system loads records in small
segments based on sub-unit designation and asserts any
necessary relations to do reasoning between the different
sub-units.
3.4 Massage TDA Data
Several rules requite cumulative figures (total
number of officers, total number of personnel in this sub-unit,
total number of officers by speciality) to determine possible
discrepanci_. The TDA document does not stoxe this infor-
mation explicitly. This phase gathers this information and
asserts it in the knowledge base for use by the rules in the next
phase.
3.5 Apply Rules
During this phase, the system applies the two rule
types to detect discrepancies. Initially, I coded a separate rule
for each listed at Appendix A. Howev¢=, the commonality
between type 2 rules permitted me to r_lace these rules with
just one. This single rule detects discrepancies by first
matching on the grading-data relation and then matching on
any TDA records that have the same level and position but
different grade. (See Figure 3)
(defrule wading-rule
(phase actions)
(wading-data ?level ?position ?grade)
(TDA
(LINE ?line)
(PARA ?para)
(SUB-PARA ?sub-para)
(GRADE ?TDAgrade&--?grade)
(DESCRIPTION ?desc&:(&&
(>= (str.index ?level ?desc) 1)
(>= (str-index ?position ?uesc) 1))))
_-->.
(assert
(discrepancy ?para ?sub.para ?line
?TDAgrade ?desc ?position ?level)))
Figure 3. Example of a Type 2 Rule
3.6 Resolve Exceptions
It is possible with type 2 rules to have different
grades for the same position and level. For example, a Major
orCaptain(grade)may bean ActionOfficer(position)atthc
ServiceSchoollevel.Ifone ofthesecasesoccursintheTDA
document, the system reports a discrepancy. Yet, either
grade is satisfactory for this position. This phase eliminates
thesediscrepanciesbefore reportingthem totheanalyst.The
'IDA System Analyzeraccomplishesthisby firstmatching
onthediscrepancyand thensearchingtheknowlcdgc basefor
a grading-data factthatmatches the level,position,and
gradeofthediscrepancy.Ifsuchafactexists,thediscrepancy
isremoved. Otherexceptionsarebandiedduringthisphase,
butmost arethe typementioned above.
3.7 Print Discrepancies
The knowledge base contains only valid discrepan-
cies at this poinL The system writes these to an output file
that can be later reviewed and manipulated by the analyst.
3.8 Clean Up
During thedatamassagephase,thesystemasserted
a number ofrelationscontainingcumulativefigures.This
information is only valid while processing the current sub-
unit. This dam musz be removed before the "IDA System
Analyzer can review the next sub-unit. This phase retracts
these facts.
The program loops through phases three to eight
until all sub-units of the TDA document are processed. The
system then closesthe TDA document file and discrepancy
output _e.
4. Performing a TDA Document Review
We integrated the TDA System Analyzer in the On-
Line TDA System as a utility module. The analyst uses the
On-Line TDA System dailyand is comfortablewith its
structure and user interface. These characteristics make
using the TDA System Analyzer easier.
The analyst first calls the On-Line TDA System's
utility module. He then chooses the TDA System Analyzer.
At this point, the user can elect to process the document with
the current parameters or he can access the dBase IIF M
database to change them. The ability to change system
parameters so readily permits him to alter dynamically the
way the system will review a documenL In addition, the
analyst can do "what-if" exercises. For example, hc may
400
wonderwhatdiscrepancies will be found if he changes
Battalion Commanders at the Service School level from
Lieutenant Colonels to Majors. The analyst does this easily
using the appropriate dBase III TM commands.
When the analyst is satisfied with the system para-
meters, he chooses the specific "IDA document to process and
tells the system to execute. A review of 10,0(30 records
requires approximately 25 minutes. This performance
compares with a typical 40 man-hour analysis - an improve-
ment of almost 100:1. In addition, the review is complete
and consistent After execution, the analyst can browse the
discrepancy output on-line or print it to hard-copy for future
reference.
The On-Line "IDA System also supports batch
processing of the TDA System Analyzer. Analyses can be
run during non-duty hours on many "IDA documents and/or
on the same document with different parameter settings.
5. Summary
The "IDA System Analyzer represents an innova-
tive way of analyzing "IDA documents. It gives the man-
power analyst the power to change dynamically the way a
document will be processed, but isolates him from the mun-
dane task ofactuaUy doing the review. He can focus more on
issues, policy, and personnel distribution problems.
The power and flexibility of the CLIPS' environ-
ment supported the rapid development of a system that could
be iteratively refined. I was able to implement quickly
improvements and changes. The power of this environment
permitted me to develop a complete system with extensions
to the basic functionality of CLIPS in less than three months.
The "views, opinions, and/or findings contained In this report are those of
the author and should not be construed as an official Department of the
Army position, policy, or decision, unless so designated by other official
documentation.
401
Appendix A
TDA System Analyzer Rules
I. Type 1 Rules
a. Officers will not work for other officers of the same grade.
b. There will be no deputies or assistants except at general officer commanded installations.
c. All ROTC military schools (e.g., Citadel, Norwich) will be allowed one Major (MAJ) as Commandant
of Cadets.
d. Support an additional ROTC Captain (CPT) position at historically black colleges.
e. No more than 30% of total officers will be field grade in any element at the Service School level.
f. Support only 75% of CAS 3 instructors in grade of Lieutenant Colonel (LTC).
g. Where there is more than one position in a single job fide/specialty, indicate that 50% of these may be
_wngraded.
h. Support only one LTC in the office of a TRADOC System Manager.
II. Type 2 Rules - indicate the appropriate grad_ for a particular position and level.
Installation
Installatmn
Installation
Installatmn
Installation
Installation
Installation
Installation
Installation
Installation
Installation
Installation
Installation
Commander Major General
Commander Brigadier General
Deputy Conmumder Brigadier General
Deputy Commander Colonel (COL)
Chief of Staff COL
Resomce Manager Director LTC
Engineering & Housing Director LTC
Inspector General LTC
Airfield Commander MAJ
S-I (Null)'
S-2 (Null)
S-3 (Null)
S-4 (Nun)
1 A null value indicates that this position is not valid at any grade for this level.
4O2
II. Type 2 Rules (continued)
LEVEL POSITION
Army Training Center (ATC) Commander
ATC Deputy Commander
Arc Chief of Staff
ATC Resource Manager Director
ATC Engineering & Housing Director
ATC Inspector Genera]
ArC Airfield Commander
ATC S-l
ATC S-2
ArC S-3
ArC S-4
Brigade Commander
Brigade Deputy Commander
Brigade Executive Officer
Brigade S- 1
Brigade S-2
Brigade S-3
Brigade S-4
Battalion Commander
Battalion Deputy Commander
Battalion Executive Officer
Battalion S-1
Battalion S-2
Battalion S-3
Battalion S..4
Service School Liaison Officer
Service School Liaison Officer
Service School Action Officer
Service School Action Officer
Service School System Manager
Service School Threat Manager
Service School Communication Skill Officer
Service School Proponency Officer Chief
Service School Department Director
Service School Department Director
ROTC Professor of Military Science
ROTC Enrollment Team Officer
Brigadier General
(Null)
(Null)
(Null)
(Null)
(Null)
(Null)
CPT
MAJ
MAJ
CPT
COL
(NuU)
LTC
CPT
C'FI"
CPT
CPT
COL
(Null)
MAJ
CPT
CPT
CPT
(Nun)
MAJ
CPT
MAJ
CPT
COL
MAJ
MAJ
LTC
COL
LTC
LTC
CPT
2 LTC will be a Depar.tment Director if there are less than 65 people in the department.
403


The Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) system analyzer

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server