Transcript XMSF and Enabling DoD M&S Capability

XMSF SUMMIT
XMSF
and
Enabling DoD M&S Capability
DMSO Perspective
by
Phil Zimmerman, Associate Director
The Vision
Defense modeling and simulation will provide readily available,
operationally valid environments for use by DoD components:
- To train jointly, develop doctrine and tactics, formulate
operational plans, and assess war fighting situations.
- To support technology assessment, system upgrade,
prototype and full scale development, and force
structuring.
Furthermore, common use of these environments will promote a
closer interaction between the operations and acquisition
communities in carrying out their respective responsibilities.
To allow maximum utility and flexibility, these modeling and
simulation environments will be constructed from affordable,
reusable components interoperating through an open
systems architecture.
DoD M&S Strategy:
An Analogy to City Planning
All simulations and
Common Technical Framework
live interfaces
• High Level Architecture
• CMMS (common world view)
• Data Standards
Common Services
• Help Desks, Education
• Resource repositories (MSRR)
• Data sources (e.g., environmental)
• VV&A policy and procedures
• Communication services
• Supporting software/tools
Payoffs: Interoperability and reuse = capability and cost-effectiveness
Extending Interoperability
The HLA Architecture
• Architecture specifies
- Ten Rules which define
relationships among
federation components
- An Object Model Template
which specifies the form
in which simulation elements
are described
- An Interface Specification
which describes the way
simulations interact during
operation
Support
Utilities
Simulations
Interfaces to
Live Players
Standard
Interface
Runtime Infrastructure (RTI)
Federation Management
Object Management
Time Management
Declaration Management
Ownership Management
Data Distribution Management
Critical Factors:
Descriptors provided in rules are foundation for reuse
Common descriptors aid common understanding
Common interface aids design and implementation
The HLA is not the RTI;
HLA says there SHALL be an RTI (API conforms to the IFSpec),
but it doesn’t specify a particular software implementation
How We Arrived
Start with a need and technical concept
Experiment to evolve a standard
• ProtoFederation Experiments
– 1995-96: resulted in initial HLA specs
– 1996-98: continued experimentation solidified std submission
• Submitted to IEEE: 1998
• Standard Published: 2000
– Approved by IEEE REVCOM
• Potential of Commercial Vendors
– Tools Market: VTC, MaK, DiSTI, Aegis, etc.
– RTI Vendors: SAIC, PitchAB (Sweden), Mitsubishi (Japan), MaK
• HLA use in
– Major US M&S programs: JSIMS, MC02, JSB, JVB, FCS, DMT, FBE,
JSF(VSWE), CJ21 (JTC)
– International Collaborations: DiMUNDS (NATO), AUS/BFTT
Necessary
but not Sufficient
• HLA provides the beginning
– An RTI enables data flow
– FOM and SOM begin the identification the
context
• NEEDED!!
– Context
• Ways to define it
• Semi-automated ways to exchange it
– Ease in assembling the pieces
– Ways to take advantage of new technology
Semantic Consistency:
Common Understanding
• Lexical
– Common vocabulary, data types
SEDRIS, UOB, FDMS
• Syntactic
– Common structures, data delivery
RTI, STF
• Semantic
– Shared understanding
OMT, FOM, SOM – just the beginning
– Key to rapidly composable systems
– Aided by readily accessed data
• True Interoperability demands all three
levels + delivery
XMSF Process
• Start with emerging standards
– Web standards
– Networking standards
– M&S standards
• Experiment to evolve a common
methodology
– Will these standards provide the
interoperability required?
– Will they enable rapid, easy data access?
– Can they move us toward composability?
– What’s missing?
XMSF Advantage?
• Standardization
– A long, hard process – easier if someone else
does it
• Accessibility
– If everyone else is storing information this
way…
– Can our data access be made easier?
• Context
– Do the new standards allow for documentation
of context in an readily accessible way?
– Can it be automated?
Quo Vadis?
• Design and carry out critical experiments
– Test for the essential “-ilities”, particularly usability and
scalability
– Test the essential components of IEEE 1516 HLA
standard in a web environment
– Determine the extent to which the web is a real time
environment
– Does the documentation capability in XML provide a
viable way to describe context?
– Can XML provide the transparency into the content of
federates that will help users assess semantic
consistency across the federation?
• What specific tests are needed to span the
parameter space?
• Is there a critical ordering?
• Increase the comfort level