Robustness of decentralized decision‐making architectures in command and control systems

Abstract

Organizations use command and control (C2) systems to collect, organize, and disseminate information in order to make decisions, impart instructions, and manage resources to accomplish a mission. C2 agility and robustness are critical to ensure that a C2 system can perform well in a variety of environments. One system design principle, decentralization, has been closely linked to desirable system characteristics such as agility and adaptability, but its relationship to system performance robustness is not well‐established. In this study, we explore C2 system architectures—ranging from fully centralized to fully decentralized archetypes—to assess their performance and robustness characteristics across a spectrum of operating environments. While the centralized archetype achieves high performance in favorable environmental conditions, its performance quickly degrades when conditions worsen, hindering its overall robustness. Conversely, the decentralized archetype achieves a lower but more stable performance profile resulting in more robustness when performance requirements are lower. Finally, we explore alternative, hybrid architectures with varying degrees of centralized and decentralized decision‐making. We find that by centralizing only certain system‐consequential functions such as resource allocation, and decentralizing more focused decision functions which can be performed suitably with only local information and resources, system performance and robustness are improved beyond that of the simple archetypes.

Dynamic strategy for low-carbon supply chain considering retailers competition and technological innovation

“…(1) Theoretical perspective: In the centralized decision-making, supply chain members form a single entity through vertical cooperation, making decisions with the common goal of maximizing joint profits [72] ; In the decentralized decision-making, supply chain members are considered to be independent, without any dominance or follower relationships. Each member makes decisions based on maximizing individual profits [73] , [74] . In the retailers alliance, retailers form a collective entity through an alliance, making decisions with the goal of maximizing alliance profits [75] .…”

Man-in-the-Loop Control and Mission Planning for Unmanned Underwater Vehicles

“…For command and control planning, command and control is the hub of war, involving information transmission, information sharing, situation awareness, planning, decision execution, and many other aspects [10][11][12][13]. A new c2 interface (command and control interface, which is a critical component of various systems and networks) is proposed in a study that enables transmission using mission decomposition and hierarchical data formats, the operation of a UAS (an Unmanned Aerial System) at different levels of autonomy, and mission communication between ground control stations and airborne systems in a transparent and consistent manner in mission planning [14].…”