Supported by
DARPA CoABS Program
Coalition Agents eXperiment (CoAX)
The Coalition TIE
http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/coax/
AFRL Rome, AIAI, Boeing, Dartmouth, DERA Malvern,
Lockheed Martin ATL, Michigan, MIT Sloan, Stanford, USC/ISI
Support from GITI, ISX, Mitre
DARPA
Scope







CoAX/Briefing/3
Coalition TIE
Coalition Scenario - Binni
Technical Approach
Initial Demonstration
Plans and Timescales
Management Plan
Summary
Coalition TIE Overview

Aim of demonstrations is to show:


interoperability between Coalition applications and
information services (via the DARPA CoABS Grid) by
using a heterogeneous agent community in multiple
distinct “domains”.
Aim will be met through a number of phased
technical demonstrations of increasing complexity.
CoAX/Briefing/4
Coalition Scenario Features










Different doctrine, decision making, rules of engagement
and, in general, mission “agendas”.
Different technology skill and equipment levels.
Different cultures and languages.
Questionable compatibility of respective national information
systems.
Limited models for coalition force operations.
Command authorities - agreement and transfers.
Variable reliability of components and infrastructures.
Information systems resource sharing agreements and
capacity.
Different interpretation of situational information.
Lack of compatible security architectures.
From LeRoy Pearce (Canadian MOD), 1999
CoAX/Briefing/5
Binni - Gateway to the Golden
Bowl of Africa - 2011
Rathmell, R.A. (1999) A Coalition Force Scenario 'Binni - Gateway to the Golden Bowl of Africa', in
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Knowledge-Based Planning for Coalition Forces,
(ed. Tate, A.) pp. 115-125, Edinburgh, Scotland, 10th-11th May 1999.
CoAX/Briefing/6
Key Technical Drivers







CoAX/Briefing/7
Working with agents in multiple dynamic domains.
Need for partial sharing of data and facilities.
Cannot assume compatibility or complete reliability of
functional capabilities, communications, security
arrangements or information resources.
Need to integrate and use legacy systems.
Need for rapid formation and management of agent
relationships.
Need to respect national concerns, limitations, cultural
and political differences, etc.
Unclear and/or emerging objectives and tasking.
Research Issues







CoAX/Briefing/8
Agent Domain Management.
Dynamic agent organization formation and management.
Inter-agent Task and Process Management.
“Come as you are” capabilities and data sources.
Detection and diagnosis of agent compatibility problems,
protocol violations and other exceptions.
Partial (secure) sharing of capabilities and information.
Shared and local visualizations for processes and
information.
Technical Approach
Grid-Aware Agent Frameworks
EMAA/CAST Agents (LM ATL)
KAoS Agents (Boeing)
Agent-Wrapped Data Sources
AODB and other DBs (LM ATL)
Ariadne (USC/ISI)
Other DBs...
LAN
Grid
LAN
CoABS Grid
(DARPA)
LAN
Agent-Wrapped Capabilities
MBP (DERA)
CAMPS (AFRL)
Multi-level Coordination (Michigan)
Intelligence Agent (Dartmouth)
Legacy Applications (LM ATL, others)
CoAX/Briefing/9
CoABS Grid Services
Domain Management Services (Boeing)
Task and Process Management (AIAI)
Incentive Management (Stanford)
Robustness Services (MIT)
Multiple Areas of Concerns
Coalition
UK
US
X-Country
Function
(e.g. intelligence)
CoAX/Briefing/10
Sub-US
Dynamic Domain Management
1. Islands of Common Policy
2. Points of Common Administration
Country X Domain
Subdomain A
Country Y Domain
Subdomain B
Coalition Domain
CoAX/Briefing/11
Demo Arrangements
UK
Representative
Narrator
Domain Management
Task & Process Management
Incentives Management
Robustness Services
Coalition
Commander
US
Representative
MBP
Ariadne Info 1
CAMPS
CAST/EMAA
Intell. Agent
Ariadne Info 2
Ariadne Info 3
MCA
CoAX/Briefing/12
New Domain
Representative
MBP Copy?
Ariadne Info 4
Month 1 - Initial Demo


Demonstration involves AFRL Rome, DERA Malvern and LM
ATL and is a first (risk reduction) step toward CoAX.
Demo shows legacy applications can be usefully integrated
into an agent framework.
Master Battle Planner v2.1
(DERA, UK)
LAN
Grid
LAN
EMAA / CAST
Agents
(LM ATL, US)
LAN
CoABS Grid
CoAX/Briefing/13
AODB
MBP Situation Map (Blue View)
CoAX Management Plan


4 phased demos – 1, 9, 18 and 30 months.
4 grid management services being explored:





3 types of involvement in TIE:





Domain Management;
Task and Process Management;
Robustness and Exception Management;
Incentives Management.
Coalition-driven Management Services – AIAI, Boeing, DERA, MIT,
Stanford;
Coalition-driven Capabilities – AFRL, Dartmouth, DERA, LM ATL,
Michigan, USC/ISI;
Coalition Scenario Usage – others.
Buddy System.
18 month demo is a focal point to engage other nations and
research teams.
CoAX/Briefing/15
Plans and Timescales





February 2000 (Month 1) - Initial AFRL/DERA/LM ATL demo.
July 2000 (Month 6) - AFRL, AIAI, Boeing, DERA and LM ATL
agents working together on the CoABS grid via KAoS on a
simple agent task. Multiple domain design document.
Scenario description.
October 2000 (Month 9) - Demo incorporating MBP,
EMAA/CAST, CAMPS and Ariadne.
July 2001 (Month 18) - Coalition scenario demo with fixed
domains to CoABS and TTCP Representatives.
July 2002 (Month 30) - Larger scale demo with more domains
and agents including dynamic domain management and
dynamic tasking.
CoAX/Briefing/16
Planned Inputs





February 2000 (Month 1) - AFRL, DERA, LM ATL responsible for
demo.
July 2000 (Month 6) – All participants have provided input to
scenario, all participants in month 9 demo are “on-the-grid”.
October 2000 (Month 9) – AFRL, AIAI, Boeing, DERA, LM ATL,
USC/ISI responsible for core demo. Michigan, MIT and Stanford
provide “on-the-grid” add-on demos and storyboards in agreed
coalition scenario.
July 2001 (Month 18) – All current participants in joint demo.
July 2002 (Month 30) – Possible participation of other nations
(especially TTCP) and CoABS participants.
CoAX/Briefing/17
Further Information




See http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/coax/
[email protected], [email protected]
Outstanding Issues follow.
Spare slides.
CoAX/Briefing/18
CoAX Outstanding Issues


Mike Kirton suggests that we seek to relate the list
of coalition and technical objectives to the specific
demonstrations we plan.
Mike Kirton notes that discussion in the TIE is
needed to establish how the scenario maps to I-X
and that maps to KAoS Domain Management.
CoAX/Briefing/19
Types of Involvement in TIE

Task management services



Agent management services



Domain management (Boeing)
Robustness (MIT)
Agent-management-aware capabilities




Task and process management (AIAI)
Incentive management (Stanford)
MBP (DERA)
CAMPS (AFRL)
Ariadne (USC/ISI)
Other Capabilities





Ariadne (USC/ISI) – unmodified
EMAA/CAST (LM-ATL)
O-Plan (AIAI)
Multi-level Coordination Agent (Michigan)
Intelligence Agent (Dartmouth)
CoAX/Briefing/20
Agent-Management-Aware
Services Structure
Agent Capability
Agent
Agent Management Helper
Service requester
LAN
Agent Management
Services provider
Grid
LAN
CoAX/Briefing/21
LAN
“Come-asyou-are”
Agent
Jeff’s Slide for Conceptual
Architecture
Task- and AgentManagement-Aware
Agent Capabilities
Combined with
Human Capabilities
Agent
Service requester
Agent Management
Helper
Agent Management
Services functionality
Agent Task
Management Services
functionality
Service provider
Service provider
LAN
Grid
LAN
CoAX/Briefing/22
Service requester
LAN
Austin’s Slide for Conceptual
Architecture
Grid Management
Services
AIAI
Task and Process
Management
Domain
Management
Grid-Aware
Capabilities
Coalition Scenario
USC/ISI
I-X
Stanford
MIT
Robustness and
Exceptions
CAST
LM ATL
CAMPS
AFRL/BBN
Boeing
Control and
Incentives
Ariadne
KAoS
MBP
DERA
O-Plan
Grid Infrastructure
MCA
AIAI
Michigan
Intell.
Dartmouth
CoAX/Briefing/23
Agent Activity Triggers

Examples of situations which will trigger the need
for information exchange by the agents include:





CoAX/Briefing/24
User checks to see if air units are over tasked,
Arrival of new information on the location / status of
a SAM site,
User creates a new package / mission and needs to
know whether Coalition assets are available,
Changes to plan details have to be disseminated to
Coalition National HQs, wings, units etc,
User checks to see if missions have completed
their tasks.
Agent Activity - Information

Examples of information to be collected,
transformed and exchanged by the agents includes:

Entity attributes:


Co-ordination information:




Timing - e.g. mission critical points (waypoints),
Membership of missions / packages,
Current 'parent' unit, etc
'Bean counting':

CoAX/Briefing/25
Location, status.
Numbers over tasked, currently airborne etc,
AFRL/DERA/LM ATL Demo(2)
MBP
Wrapper
Scenario
data – for
target and
asset data
JavaSpace
MBP
Tanker
Planning
Agent
Intelligence
Update
Agent
DERA
Target
Agent
DERA
Asset
Agent
The GRID
EMAA /
CAST
Agent
CoAX/Briefing/26
MBP
Proxy
Agent
EMAA /
CAST
Agent
AODB
AFRL/DERA/LM ATL Demo
Situation at Day 3

TFM 95



Based at RAF Leuchars
Day 3 - 29th September
Overland offensive, Iona


Mythical opponent
UNCLASSIFIED data ...
Opponent's Airspace
Iona Chemical
Storage Area *
T
FLOT
RAF Leuchars
Friendly Airspace
RAF Prestwick
Opponent's Airspace
* This is an entirely mythical site / scenario
TFM is the Tactical Fighter Meet
CoAX/Briefing/27