|
000
| 02899cam 2200373zi 4500 |
|---|
| 001 | 9.875963 |
|---|
| 003 | CaOODSP |
|---|
| 005 | 20221107164603 |
|---|
| 006 | m o d f |
|---|
| 007 | cr ||||||||||| |
|---|
| 008 | 190708t20082008onca #ob f000 0 eng d |
|---|
| 040 | |aCaOODSP|beng|erda|cCaOODSP |
|---|
| 043 | |an-cn--- |
|---|
| 086 | 1 |aD68-5/040-2008E-PDF |
|---|
| 100 | 1 |aDobias, Peter, |eauthor. |
|---|
| 245 | 10|aModeling individual decision-making and command and control in MANA / |cPeter Dobias, Kevin Sprague, Gerald Woodill. |
|---|
| 264 | 1|a[Ottawa] : |bDefence R&D Canada, Centre for Operational Research and Analysis, Land Forces Operational Research Team, |c2008. |
|---|
| 264 | 4|c©2008 |
|---|
| 300 | |a1 online resource (vi, 18 pages, 2 unnumbered pages) : |billustrations. |
|---|
| 336 | |atext|btxt|2rdacontent |
|---|
| 337 | |acomputer|bc|2rdamedia |
|---|
| 338 | |aonline resource|bcr|2rdacarrier |
|---|
| 490 | 1 |aTechnical note ; |vDRDC CORA TN 2008-040 |
|---|
| 500 | |a"November 2008." |
|---|
| 504 | |aIncludes bibliographical references (page 14). |
|---|
| 520 | 3 |a"Analyzing something as complex as command and control (C2) during a conflict requires viable alternatives to analytical models and even to interactive wargames. Agent-based models (ABM) such as MANA might prove to be such an alternative tool. ABMs are fully automated computer simulations, which once set up do not normally require human intervention. Agents within an ABM can communicate with one another, share situational awareness (SA) and respond to commands according to preset rules and conditions. In this paper, several different examples of modeling C2 structures in MANA are presented in the context of four different types of scenarios modeled previously by DRDC CORA. While MANA does not provide a direct means of modeling command hierarchy, there are rather effective means of bypassing this limitation, and a limited command structure can be modeled. Also, MANA has a very well developed SA sharing capability that provides a host of options for studying C2. The presented examples range from a traditional force on force operation to crowd confrontation and convoy dynamics in the presence of an active insurgency. Examples of C2 within friendly and opposing forces are discussed. The latter is especially important in view of the intricacies of the current security situation in which the predominant opponents are irregular force"--Abstract, page i. |
|---|
| 692 | 07|2gccst|aDecision making |
|---|
| 692 | 07|2gccst|aControl |
|---|
| 692 | 07|2gccst|aModelling |
|---|
| 700 | 1 |aSprague, K. B., |d1969- |eauthor. |
|---|
| 700 | 1 |aWoodill, Gerald, |eauthor. |
|---|
| 710 | 2 |aDefence R&D Canada. |bCentre for Operational Research and Analysis. |
|---|
| 830 | #0|aTechnical note (Defence R&D Canada)|vDRDC CORA TN 2008-040.|w(CaOODSP)9.820563 |
|---|
| 856 | 40|qPDF|s3.24 MB|uhttps://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2019/rddc-drdc/D68-5-040-2008-eng.pdf |
|---|