Using BML for Command & Control of Autonomous Unmanned Air Systems

Transcription

1 Using BML for Command & Control of Autonomous Unmanned Air Systems Dr. Kevin Heffner Pegasus Simulation Montreal, QC, Canada Dr. Fawzi Hassaine Defence R&D Canada Ottawa Canada, ON, Canada 10F-SIW-054

2 Presentation Overview Introduction Types of UAVs and UAS Operational Requirements Automation and Autonomy Current UAS Architectures Battle Management Language BML-Enabled UAS Command and Control Conclusions 2

3 Introduction The work presented here is based on the following question: Can the use of a tactical-level, formal language such as the family of languages commonly referred to as Battle Management Languages be leveraged for the command and control of autonomous UVS? 3

4 Types of UAVs and UAS Operational Requirements 4

5 Types of UAV Classification Range Tier n/a: Micro UAVs (MUAV), Tier I: Low altitude, low endurance (LALE) Tier II: Medium altitude, long endurance (MALE) Tier II+: High altitude, long endurance (HALE) Tier III-: HALE + low observability. Echelon Class I Small units Class II Companies Class III Battalions Class IV Brigades Function Reconnaissance Target & Decoy Logistics Combat R&D 5

6 UAS Operational Requirements Capabilities Collaborative UAVs Swarming UAVs Inter UAV collaboration Communication transmission support Fighter-UAV Support Extra-UAV collaboration Challenges Airspace deconfliction Dynamic Re-routing Augmented Payload Capabilities Automatic Target Recognition Automated Weapons Fire Legalities (e.g. Accountability) New doctrine and TTP Dismounted Soldier Systems Localized reconnaissance Size Weight and Power (SWaP) Operator Interface, Info sharing Enhanced Operator Interfaces Lightened Operator Cognitive Load Multiple UAV, single operator Automation strategies Higher levels of autonomy 6

7 US Army UAS Roadmap (mid/far-term) US ARMY Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmp

8 Current UAS Architectures 8

9 STANAG 4586 UAV Control Station Functional Architecture Adapted from figure B-4 in STANAG 4586 Ed 2.5

10 STANAG 4586 UAV Control Station Issues Information Overload Formatted Text Messages Air Gap 10 1 Figure adapted from figure B-4 in STANAG 4586 Ed 2.5

11 STANAG 4586 NNEC/SOA Working Group 1 1 Taken from May 2010 STANAG 4586 Meeting Presentation by Chris Allport

12 Automation and Autonomy 12

13 Automation versus Autonomy Automation1 is the use of control systems and information technologies reducing the need for human intervention. Autonomy2 is Self-government [...] The capacity of a system to make a decision about its actions without the involvement of another system or operator. 1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation 2http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/autonomy 13

14 Levels of Automation Automation - Using machines to perform tasks and execute processes Level Levels of Automation * 1 The computer offers no assistance: human must take all decision and actions. 2 The computer offers a complete set of decision/action alternatives, or 3 narrows the selection down to a few, or 4 suggests one alternative, and 5 executes that suggestion if the human approves, or 6 allows the human a restricted time to veto before automatic execution, or 7 executes automatically, then necessarily informs humans, and 8 informs the human only if asked, or 9 informs the human only if it, the computer, decides to. 10 The computer decides everything and acts autonomously, ignoring the human. * T.B. Sheridan and W.L. Verplank

15 Levels of Autonomy Autonomy Achieving a set of prescribed objectives, adapt to major changes, develop its own objectives. ALFUS 1 UAS Autonomy 2 An Unmanned Aircraft system exhibits autonomy when the system software is capable of making - and is entrusted to make - substantial real-time decisions, without human involvement or supervision Autonomous Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems Software Quality Assessment and Safety Assurance - AeroVations Associates,

16 Command and Control & Automation/Autonomy Command Authoritative act of making decisions and ordering action. Mission Goals Autonomy Control The act of monitoring and influencing this action. Tasks Automation Using automation as an enabler for higher levels of autonomy requires automation strategies 16

17 Automation Strategies Automation Management Strategies LOA A Human-based Management Level 1 B Management-by-consent Level 5 C Management-by-exception Level 6 D Machine-based Management Levels 7, 8, 9, 10 Implementing higher-level automation management strategies requires a greater formalism than found in formatted text messages. 17

18 Battle Management Language 18

19 SISO C-BML C-BML-Enabled Information Exchange among C2, Simulation & Robotic Systems Focus of this work Primary SISO C-BML focus 19

20 Interoperability-Enabling Standard BML can be an enabler of information work-flows Standardization is required to support interoperability Within forces Joint operations Coalition operations SISO is working toward a specification for standard 20

21 C-BML Characteristics Common Interface for exchange of expressions (orders, plans, requests, reports). Expressiveness of all relevant actions to be performed by real, simulated or robotic forces based on 5 Ws ( Who-What-Where-When-Why ) includes the capability to express the NATO 5-paragraph Operations Order (OPORD) and tactical messages. Unambiguous and Parseable allows for a mathematical representation that supports automated processing. 21

22 BML Example Order: Who/What/Where <OrderPush> <Task> <AirTask> <TaskeeWho> <UnitID>CA-UAV</UnitID> </TaskeeWho> <What> <WhatCode>CLARSP</WhatCode> </What> <Where> <WhereID> </WhereID>... GENCOORDINATE <WhereLocation> <GDC> <Latitude> </Latitude> <Longitude> </Longitude> <ElevationAGL>3000.0</ElevationAGL> </GDC> </WhereLocation>... </Where> 22

23 BML Example Order: When + <StartWhen> <WhenTime> <StartTimeQualifier>AT</StartTimeQualifier> <DateTime> </DateTime> </WhenTime> </StartWhen> <AffectedWho><UnitID>OMF195-B12</UnitID> </AffectedWho> <TaskID> </TaskID> </AirTask> </Task> <OrderIssuedWhen> </OrderIssuedWhen> <OrderID> </OrderID> <TaskerWho> <UnitID> 1-HBCT </UnitID> </TaskerWho>... <TaskOrganization> <UnitID> CA-UAV </UnitID> </TaskOrganization> </OrderPush> 23

24 BML Example: French 66 th Battalion Report 1 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <BMLReport> <Report> <StatusReport> <GeneralStatusReport> <ReporterWho> <UnitID>FRA-6611</UnitID> </ReporterWho> <Context>MyContext</Context> <Hostility>FR</Hostility> <Executer> <Taskee> <UnitID>FRA-6611</UnitID> </Taskee> </Executer> <OpStatus>OPR</OpStatus>... <WhereLocation> <GDC> <Latitude> </Latitude> <Longitude> </Longitude> </GDC> </WhereLocation> <When> </When> <ReportID>7</ReportID> <Credibility> <Source>AOBSR</Source> <Reliability>A</Reliability> <Certainty>RPTFCT</Certainty> </Credibility> </GeneralStatusReport> </StatusReport> </Report> </BMLReport> 1 Taken from the MSG-048 Technical Activity See 10F-SIW

25 Using BML for C2 of Autonomous UAS 25

26 BML-enabled UAV Control Station Architecture + = 26

27 BML-enabled UAV GCS Architecture: Why? C2-UAS Interoperability C-BML uses the JC3IEDM as the underlying data model. Benefits of re-using JC3IEDM data elements in a formal language. ADatP-3, USMTF, OTH-Gold are largely transposable to JC3IEDM information content elements although some work is still remaining. STANAG 4586 currently addressing UAS C2 Interoperability with an XML-based service-oriented approach consistent with the BML approach.

28 BML-enabled UAV GCS Architecture: Why? Next Generation HCI Operators will be required for quite some time. Need to improve, enhance Human-Computer Interface. Approach supports the introduction of agent-based technology for intelligent adaptive systems and intelligent adaptive interfaces. Autonomy of platform & autonomy of operator! Reduced human-induced error, increased operator efficiency. 28

29 BML-enabled UAV GCS Architecture: Why? Simulation Can leverage simulation-based capabilities for: acquisition training decision-support systems experimentation of new UAV-C2 architectures 29

30 Conclusions 30

31 Conclusions The future battlefields will see increasing robotic force deployment. New UAS capabilities will require higher levels of autonomy. Automation is an enabler to achieving higher levels of UAS autonomy at the operator level and at the platform level. BML offers undeniable advantages for UAV control over current mechanisms and can facilitate new capabilities. Specifically in the areas of: (1) UAS-C2 interoperability, (2) Next-generation UAV operator interfaces and (3) leveraging simulation-based capabilities. UAS standardization bodies are currently considering solutions for addressing C2-UAS interoperability requirements, that have been addressed in part by BML. 31

32 Using BML for Command & Control of Autonomous Unmanned Air Systems Questions? 10F-SIW