Upload
jack-ring
View
140
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
System Engineering large scale Test and Evaluation. Emphasizes determining Fitness for Purpose and/or Readiness for Operation of deployed systems.Focuses on producing actionable knowledge for the warfighter.
Citation preview
System Engineering Next Generation T&E
Jack RingEduce LLC
Attributed reuse permitted
TheFit For Purpose
Paradigm
ITEA SoS Workshop: The NIE Experience
El Paso, TX, July 17, 2013
Intended Takeaways
The tenets of Test & Evaluation currently taught and practiced are not sufficient for net-centric SoS, especially at brigade scale.
Key gaps are:a) In-field modeling of the anticipated engagement and
formulating a ConOps for the warfighter’s intervention system.
b) System Design and Engineering of a responsive T&E system.
c) Inadequate SoSSE and Acquisition policies and practices.
Next Step: Develop a cadre of T&E Systemists.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 2
You don’t know JackYou don’t know Jack
1957 – Present. GE 20, Honeywell 10, Edelbrock 3, Ascent Logic 2, IBM OTP 1, Entrepreneur 20. Kennen Technologies LLC, OntoPilot LLC, Educe LLC.
System Test & Evaluation (Atlas ICBM Radio Guidance System) System Engineering (State-determined Stochastic Non-deterministic Systems).
Inaugural chair, 1970, GE-wide workshop on Software Engineering. Led SAFE system concept definition for multi-agency federation of
intelligence collection, analysis and production. Product Manager, Distributed Transaction Processing products suite. Led Computer Integrated Manufacturing shop floor control network demo
involving 20 vendors using GM MAP protocol.
?
SME: Autonomous System T&E technologies. Tutorials & Papers; ITEA, INCOSE, INCOSE IL, ISSS,
IEEE-SMC, IEEE SysCon, ICSEng, NIST. Patent co-author, General Purpose Set Theoretic
Processor Architecture and Method.04/08/23 3
The Net-Centric Paradigm
Anticipated Engagement
Warfighter’s Engagement
Model
Net-centricSoS
SoSRealized & Deployed
SoSDesign
WarfighterAction
Is this a system?Will it be Fit For Purpose?Is it still Fit For Purpose?Conduct
T&E Sessions
SysEng T&E System
Realize T&E System
Red Force, Blue Force, Green Force, Grey Force
Predictable + Adaptive + Autonomous assets
SoSSEPraxis(i)
ActionableKnowledge
Lead Time?
Adaptation
Cycle Time
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 4
Warfighters Deserve To Know
Is This System FIT FOR PURPOSE, F4P?
Is This System Still FIT FOR PURPOSE, F4P?
POSIWID: the purpose of a system is what it does, regardless of designer or operator intent.
The Mean Time to Configuration Change. MTTCC, of a brigade-scale system
may be < 15 minutes. The F4P test must be run at MTTCC/2
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 5
Current T&E Situation
Gap: Inadequate warfighter-trusted knowledge regarding the dynamic and integrity limits of multi-node networks of heterogeneous, autonomous systems.
Status: Current T&E, e.g., NIE, is a) 10X too expensive and time consuming and b) Does not determine Fit For Purpose.
Talent: T&E community competencies have dwindled toward instrumentation and data technicians. Does not leverage NCO knowledge and learning.
Remediation: The current resurgence of system engineering and system of systems engineering does not provide the necessary facts.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 6
Why Beyond T&E?
Current T&E < <Factor > > Beyond
System of Interest Focus Effect of SOI on larger system
Does system meet Requirements?
Question Will SoS be Fit for Purpose(s)?
DataTENA
Key Capability System modelingDesign of Experiment
Errors, Operational Capabilities
Findings Loci of dynamic and integrity limits
Data Work Product Actionable Knowledge
Acquisition Serves Warfighter04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 7
WarfighterConOps
AnticipatedEngagement
6SystemRealization
& ResilienceInventory of Components
54
2Effects
CapabilitiesMOE’s
OperationalSystem
Engineering
3
Acquisition
ApplicationKnowledge
Base
ProblematicSituation
1
Operatorse.g.,
Warfighters
F4P?7Y
N
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 8
SoS Interoperability Principles
• A system exists only when deployed, activated and responding to stimuli.
• Entails orchestration of “N” self-adapting systems that exhibit the desired effects.
• The dynamic and integrity limits of any system are determined bya) Progress properties: starting from some state reach a
desired state in a finite number of steps.b) Safety/Integrity properties: maintain certain states that
always insure correct progress.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 9
Key Gap Closing Actions
1. Engagement Modeling
2. SE of T&E of SoS F4P
3. Develop a cadre of T&E Systemists
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 10
1. Engagement Modeling• Warfighters, envision their intervention system by deciding
a) the intended Effects, Measures of Effectiveness and Capabilities of their intended SoS and b) the likely evolution as interaction progresses and c) update their SoS model at the pace of engagement or resource change.
• Warfighters need an modeling method and tool to clarify the explicit and implicit effects of the problem system and intervention system on each other, notably [Input/Output, Performance, Technology, Tradeoff Gradients, Testability, and Cost]*
• Warfighters need an asset knowledge base provided by the Acquisition community.
* Model-based System Engineering by A. Wayne Wymore, CRC Press, 199504/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 11
1.1 The Warfighter SoS Model1.1 The Warfighter SoS Model
Intended: Emergence & Prevention of Emergence
The truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth.
InformaticsThermodynamics
BiomaticsTeleonomics
Social DynamicsEconomicsEcologics
Model must be directly executable. based on a formal ontology.reflexive.
Minimal Implicate Order04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 12
WHENWHO
WHERE
WHAT
HOW
“Day 2”of SoS Projects Until End of Life At speed of SoS evolution
Actionable Knowledge
DevelopmentField Ops
Training Exercises in situ (Battlefield)
Whole system span, e.g., DOTMLPFThird Generation SENon-deterministic SoS’s
With WarfightersBy Purple-suiters
And Civilian SME’S
Intended Outcomes: A new T&E paradigm. Enthusiasm to Transition. Justifiable budgets.
Joint OperationsBrigade-scaleWarfighters
WHY
More with less
Knowledge Discovery/Usage
New User Paradigms
Adequate, Accurate, Timely Trusted, Cyber-AssuredIndependent & ObjectiveSimple Autonomous
Engagement-specific Physical & Cyber T&E enterprise
Many Kinds of T&EFamily of T&E systems
PEOsPMs
Test Range Executives
FAA, FCC, DHSAllies, Congress
2. SE of T&E
Of F4P
2. SE of T&E
Of F4P
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 13
2.1 Is Each Stage of the Warfighter SoS viable?
1) Ensure Acquisition SoSSE a) describes progress properties and safety/integrity properties and b) Includes sufficient self-test in components.
2) Leverage new technology that automates System Readiness Assessment: a) Software problems: Reduced to ≈ 1% of current.b) System Integration cost/time: Reduced to ≈ 20% of
current experience.c) Test abort delays: Reduced by ≈ 40% of current T&E
experience.d) Cybersecurity: Reduced vulnerability.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 14
2.2 Is the Warfighter SoS Fit For Purpose?
• Confirm that anticipated and demonstrated dynamic and integrity limits of warfighter’s SoS are necessary, sufficient and efficient.
• Apply from Day 2 of a new engagement project through Year N of the SoS usage/evolution cycle --- as often as MTTCC/2.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 15
2.3.a Is the SoS Personnel Subsystem Systemic?
= U * P * C where; U = degree of understandingP = level of role proficiencyC = level of collaboration ability
Beneficiaries
Supply
Operators
DB Admin
Beneficiaries
Supply
Operators
DB Admin
Z = model of the local system of interest = fidelity of Z to S
Config Admin
In-service Eng.
Dev.Eng.
Systems Eng.Z(S1)
Config Admin
In-service Eng.
Dev. Eng.
Systems Eng. Z(S2) J. Ring & A. Madni, “Key Challenges in SoS Engineering” 2005 IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Waikoloa, Hawaii October 10-12, 2005
Node 1 Node (i)
04/08/23 16
2.3.b Are SoS-wide Changes Coherent?2.3.b Are SoS-wide Changes Coherent?
X, d(X)/dt, d2(X)/dt2
Thermodynamics: mass, momentum and energyInformatics: data, information and knowledge Teleonomics: skills, rate of learning, and rate of invention Human social dynamics: trust, enthusiasm, co-evolutionEconomic: Investment, ROI, Liquidity Ecology: Waste, Fads, Unintended Consequences
Consistent with Conservation Laws?Consistent with Conservation Laws?
Adjust: Gradients on relationshipsArrange: Pattern of relationshipsCo-align: Content of system with context and resources.
1704/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted
3. Develop a cadre of T&E Systemists
c) Executable models enable system composition. d) Ensures requisite information from acquisition programs.e) Accelerates co-learning of all involved.
a) Conduct 12-15 person expeditions that implement ConOps. 3X100 day cycles. 20 teams in five years.
b) Adept at all degrees of Extent, Variety, Ambiguity.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 18
3.1 Use Work Program of Complexity
Discovery:
Resolution:
Diagnosis is done by an experienced individual professional, who iterates with the group until the description is fully understood and accepted.
UNDERSTANDING COMPLEXITY: THOUGHT & BEHAVIOR, 2002, www.jnwarfield.comA HANDBOOK OF INTERACTIVE MANAGEMENT, 1990/1994, www.jnwarfield.com
Implementation is carried out by whatever means the design specifies.
Description is done in a group process. focus on problematic situation and underlying problem system.
Design is done in a group process. involves both formal logic and behavioral pathologies.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted
19
3.2 Create Self-synergizing SystemistsRelationship Meaning Mediators
Co-evolve Morphing toward
Win-Win-Win
Joy-enabled Level of Consciousness
Co-facilitate Value Out/Value In ≈ eN Stewardship by N participants
Co-learn Meaningful reflection Shared knowledge claims
Collaborate Help one another Desire to serve
Co-celebrate En-joying one another Time & Space, F2F
Cooperate Compatible Actions Willing to wait
Commit Principled relationship Courage to plan
Converge Common compelling purpose
Shared self-respect
Communicate Share interests and values Common language
Connect Two discover one another Accessible attributes
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 20
3.3 Encourage Reflective Practitioners3.3 Encourage Reflective Practitioners
Four ascending levels of behavior: •Know how.
•Reflection -- on how 'know how' was applied.
•Knowing-in-action (devising while doing)
•Reflection-in-action.
A Practitioner must have two kinds of knowing:• Objectivist - descriptive• Constructivist – prescriptive - world making
Designing cannot be taught -- but can be coached• Joint experimentation. • Follow Me!• Hall of Mirrors.
Educating the Reflective Practitioner, Donald Schon, Jossey Bass, 1987
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 21
Recap: F4P Paradigm Benefits
1) Free. Return >> Investment.2) Consistent with DoD 5000.2 (effects, capabilities).3) Consistent with Swarms of Autonomous Systems.4) Benefits Acquisition community as well as warfighters.5) Dynamic and integrity limits inform Design of Experiments.6) Effective in at least defense, aviation, homeland security,
industry supply chains, knowledge discovery/vetting networks, and human activity systems.
7) Re-orients and prepares system engineering personnel to leverage next generation technologies.
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 22
04/08/23 [email protected], attributed reuse permitted 23
Clarifications?Questions?Comments?
The castle, Jack,
besiege the CASTLE!
Thank you!