Representing Human Behavior in Military Simulations Interim Report (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
MODELING NEEDS FOR HUMAN BEHAVIOR REPRESENTATION
MODELING NEEDS FOR HUMAN BEHAVIOR REPRESENTATION
Pages 10-21
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 10... ...
The panel interprets this as a need for representation of larger units and organizations, as well as for better agreement between the behavior of modeled forces (individual combatants and teams) and that of real forces; for less predictability of modeled forces, to prevent trainees from gaming the training simulations; for more variability due not just to randomness but also to reasoned behavior in a complex environment and for realistic individual differences among human agents; for more intelligence to reflect the behavior of capable, trained forces; and for more adaptivity to reflect the dynamic nature of the simulated environment and intelligent forces.
|
From page 11... ...
More structure and prioritization will be needed to drive the development of the program plan to be presented in our final report. However, the panel as it is constituted lacks the military background and knowledge required to establish broad-based priorities for military human behavior representation requirements.
|
From page 12... ...
Representation of communication processes also depends on the specific purposes of the simulation but should follow doctrine associated with the particular element. Communication need be represented only when it is providing relevant objective status, situation assessment, or unit status information that will affect action at the level of the unit being represented.
|
From page 13... ...
as a special case of sensory input critical to modeling the interactions of individual combatants with team members. To be consistent with the behavior of real humans, individual combatant models must also exhibit selective attention, a process whereby information processing is focused on a relatively small subset of the sensory stimuli available at any time.
|
From page 14... ...
HOW PROCESS MODELS OF THE UNIT SUPPORT THESE NEEDS The behavioral requirements at the unit level are accomplished by taking into account specific structures and processes. As at the individual level, our claim is simply that these structures and processes are critical determiners of observable unit-level behaviors that are important to military simulations.
|
From page 15... ...
In the context of human behavior simulations, it implies that an individual or unit is capable of evaluating the results of its own actions and can change behavior in order to improve the result when the same or a similar circumstance is presented more than once. Current simulation models under review by the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office lack any capability of learning from experience and adapting appropriately to changes in the contingencies in the environment.
|
From page 16... ...
Although we are a long way from building learning models that could replace knowledge acquisition in this way, it is a direction to be explored. A key concern to be addressed in dealing with human behavior representations that learn is level-of-expertise control and certification.
|
From page 17... ...
In all these cases, the unpredictability of behavior can be captured relatively simply and reasonably accurately by the introduction of random or stochastic noise in the simulation. Fourth, mathematical models and computer simulations of human behavior have been carried out since the 1950s by cognitive psychologists (and, more recently, cognitive scientists)
|
From page 18... ...
Fifth, it is sometimes claimed that fixed and deterministic models are adequate even in the face of known variability in the modeled behavior, to the extent that they represent linear and mean approximations of the underlying behavior. Human behavioral mechanisms, however, are anything but simple and linear, and there are numerous demonstrations that qualitatively incorrect predictions are produced by mean approximations to behavioral distributions.
|
From page 19... ...
Finally, the command and control structure is an amalgamation of structures, so no single measure adequately captures its behavior. NEED FOR LARGE-UNIT BEHAVIOR REPRESENTATION The representation of larger units, such as squadrons and battalions, brigades and wings, and divisions and higher echelons, is manifest in the structures through
|
From page 20... ...
Similarly, models are needed that reflect alternative command and control structures. Current military simulations rarely model the command, control, and communication structure.
|
From page 21... ...
For example, research in crisis management suggests that disasters are not scalable (Carley and Harrald, 1997~. When scalability can be assumed, then the same model of unit behavior can be used regardless of unit size.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.