The Generation, Use, and Misuse of PKs" in Vulnerability/Lethality Analyses"

Deitz, Paul H.; Starks, Michael W.

doi:10.21236/ada340652

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A Level-7 Mission specification package with references to associated Level-6 Environment and Level-5 Location/Time specification packages collectively represents the "Missions" part of the MMF; Level-1 through Level-4 and the four Operators are collectively the "Means" by which Missions are accomplished (hence, the name Missions and Means Framework). The MMF is intended to provide a compatible extension to the Vulnerability/ Lethality Taxonomy in Deitz (1989Deitz ( , 1999 and Klopcic (1992), the DoD Architecture Framework in Wolfowitz (2003c), and the Functional Descriptions of the Mission Space (FDMS) in Haddix (2003).…”

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Military Missions and Means Framework

Sheehan¹,

Deitz²,

Bray³

et al. 2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports,

show abstract

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Military Missions and Means Framework

Sheehan¹,

Deitz²,

Bray³

et al. 2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this way, the server can guarantee that all data "holes" are filled. 2 Also, all clients will know when they are receiving results from an (invalid) default distribution.…”

Section: Nodamagementioning

confidence: 99%

The Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) Lethality Communication Server. Volume I: Overview

Sauerborn¹

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new approach to handling battle simulation lethality is presented. In this approach, a single vulnerability/lethality server provides standard distributed interactive simulation (DIS) damage states to entities fast enough for most real-time applications. Benefits include DIS simulations being freed from the burden of maintaining damage state tables and DIS exercises being easier to configure as a whole. A DIS software implementation is freely available by contacting the author. THE DISTRIBUTED INTERACTIVE SIMULATION (DIS) LETHALITY COMMUNICATION SERVER VOLUME 1: OVERVIEW 1. PURPOSE This report presents an overview of the distributed interactive simulation (DIS) lethality communication server (the server). The report's scope is focused on the server's purpose, overall design, and some particular features. However, this text cannot be used to effectively prepare, operate, or modify the server. (Refer to Volume 2 of this report for these practical considerations.) Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to

show abstract

“…A key insight then was that the LF process could be cleanly separated into a series of linked state spaces 1,2 . The first is the state of materiel prior to a shot, the second is the state of the materiel following the shot, the third is the capability of a platform, given damage 3 , and, finally, the fourth is the military utility of the platform.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The missions and means framework as an ontology

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The analysis of warfare frequently suffers from an absence of logical structure for a] specifying explicitly the military mission and b] quantitatively evaluating the mission utility of alternative products and services. In 2003, the Missions & Means Framework (MMF) was developed to redress these shortcomings. The MMF supports multiple combatants, levels of war and, in fact, is a formal embodiment of the Military Decision-Making Process (MDMP).A major effect of incomplete analytic discipline in military systems analyses is that they frequently fall into the category of ill-posed problems in which they are under-specified, under-determined, or under-constrained. Critical context is often missing. This is frequently the result of incomplete materiel requirements analyses which have unclear linkages to higher levels of warfare, system-of-systems linkages, tactics, techniques and procedures, and the effect of opposition forces. In many instances the capabilities of materiel are assumed to be immutable. This is a result of not assessing how platform components morph over time due to damage, logistics, or repair.Though ill-posed issues can be found many places in military analysis, probably the greatest challenge comes in the disciplines of C4ISR supported by ontologies in which formal naming and definition of the types, properties, and interrelationships of the entities are fundamental to characterizing mission success. Though the MMF was not conceived as an ontology, over the past decade some workers, particularly in the field of communication, have labelled the MMF as such. This connection will be described and discussed.

show abstract

The Generation, Use, and Misuse of PKs" in Vulnerability/Lethality Analyses"

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

The Military Missions and Means Framework

The Military Missions and Means Framework

The Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) Lethality Communication Server. Volume I: Overview

The missions and means framework as an ontology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About