Sensor Platform Management Strategies in a Multi-Threat Environment

Mane, Muharrem; DeLaurentis, Daniel

doi:10.2514/6.2012-2546

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Various fusion methods have included optimization methods [41] and upstream data fusion [42]. Key issues raised for future systems are threats [43], communications [44], and partial observability [45]. To alleviate the reliance on a machine-only autonomous approach is to use automation with C2 visualization.…”

Section: Resource Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agile battle management efficiency for command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (C4I)

Blasch

Bélanger

2016

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Various operations such as civil-military co-operation (CIMIC) affairs require orchestration of communications, assets, and actors. A key component includes technology advancements to enable coordination among people and machines the ability to know where things are, who to coordinate with, and open and consistent lines of communication. In this paper, we explore concepts of battle management (BM) to support high-tempo emergency response scenarios such as a disaster action response team (DART). Three concepts highlighted of agile battle management (ABM) include source orchestration (e.g., sensors and domains), battle management language (BML) development (e.g., software and ontologies), and command and control (C2) coordination (e.g., people and visualization); which require correlation and de-confliction. These concepts of ABM support the physical, information, and cognitive domains for efficient command, control, communications, and information (C3I) to synchronize data and people for efficient and effective operations.

show abstract

Section: Resource Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agile battle management efficiency for command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (C4I)

Blasch

Bélanger

2016

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a system of systems, a functional capability can be allocated to multiple physical entities with the functionality performed by each physical entity being executed according to the inputs (matter, energy, and information) that it receives from external entities and any local energy, matter, or information resident in the physical entity. Table 2, which is adapted from Mane and DeLaurentis (2012), shows an example possible allocations of missile tracking, assessment and evaluation, and sensor tasking functionality that complete the tracking loop in the functional C2BMC architecture presented in Figure 2 to physical architectures that have multiple sensors for collecting data and a single command and control (C2) node. In a centralized architecture, all functionality is allocated to a single C2 node, and none of the sensors is operationally independent of the C2 node.…”

Section: • Communication Protocols and Capacitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

1.4.2 Synthesizing and Specifying Architectures for System of Systems

Kenley¹,

Dannenhoffer²,

Wood³

et al. 2014

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on our experience with defining and evaluating system of systems and architectures using agent-based modeling, we describe the steps that we have employed in the context of a well-known process for defining system architectures and identify which steps of the process capture the unique characteristics of a system of systems. We describe a particular method that we developed to automate the generation of the communications links needed for executable simulation models when evaluating a large architectural design space, and we review model-based systems engineering methods that are applicable to specifying systems of systems and that support developing executable agent-based simulation models.

show abstract