Battlefield History Training and Simulation

 Certainly not a new thing, saw and participated in such wargaming simulations as early as the late 70's with very advanced graphics.  But was clearly not what we would call 'virtual reality' today, but what might be something like keyboard or pen input and then output of simulated results, in non real-times.  Much less than computer gaming speed.   And here aimed at historical data.  Note to the use of 'liquid' interaction models, also an intriguing advance. Still a telling example of advances made since then.

Virtual reality battlefield technology designed to train military leaders  by Purdue University in TechXPlore

A new and modern approach to understanding battlefield history may soon help prepare future military leaders in the U.S.

Purdue University innovators have developed battlefield simulation technology that they used to produce a virtual reality tour of the D-Day beaches in Normandy, France.

"We have worked with military education partners to refine our virtual reality technology to provide a useful tool for future military leaders," said Sorin Adam Matei, a professor of communication and associate dean in Purdue's College of Liberal Arts. "We apply what we know from the field of physics and treat the virtual soldiers almost like liquids that are interacting on the battlefield. Military educators can use this tool to teach future leaders lessons learned from historic battles in a visually exciting way that brings them to life for the students."

Their work is part of the FORCES (4S)—Strategy, Security and Social Systems Initiative in Purdue's College of Liberal Arts. More information is available at purdue.university/forces.

The initiative supports the use of social scientific research in strategy and security activities to shape long-range and global military, political and organizational decision-making for a just, stable and secure world. Other members of the team are Jonathan Poggie, a professor of engineering; Robert Kirchubel, an educator and retired Army lieutenant colonel; and Matthew Konkoly, a research assistant.  ... "

Strategic Decisions from Wargaming?

In my early days worked with the DOD,  Used wargaming, but mostly about testing new technology as part of operational warfighting decisions.  Not broader strategy decisions.    So this interests me.

What Strategic Decisions on the Horizon for the Department of Defense Can Best Be Shaped Through Wargaming?
by Sebastian Joon Bae  RAND

August 3, 2020
Two strategic decisions hang heavy over the Department of Defense (DoD): 1) How does the DoD redesign the Joint Force to meet the challenges of future contingencies and wars? 2) How will the department pay for it? These questions are not new, but their importance cannot be understated. For years, all the services have been diligently pursuing potential answers, spurring a litany of emerging warfighting concepts and organizational restructuring. Examples abound from the Army's Multi-Domain Operations (PDF) and the Marine Corps' Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations to the establishment of Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability and Army's Future Command.

So, how could wargaming shape these decisions? The answer is simple: wargaming is already an integral part and should continue to be. As an incredibly adaptable analytical tool, wargaming can examine competing courses of action, explore the effects of emerging technologies, and assess operational concepts. This is reflected in the plethora of wargames examining the future force, both within the military and its federally funded research and development centers.

The role of wargaming in the ongoing transformation of the Marine Corps serves as a poignant example. In his 2019 Commandant's Planning Guidance, General David H. Berger, 38th Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC), repeatedly emphasized the pivotal role of wargaming in force design, education, and training. The CMC argues that wargaming will not only inform future force design but could help educate and train future commanders. In the subsequent Force Design 2030 (PDF), the CMC again reinforced the utility of wargaming—ranging from concept refinement to the programming process. Moreover, Expeditionary Warrior, the Marine Corps' Title 10 wargame series, continues to support future concept development, including Future Maritime Operations and the Joint Operational Access Concept. The forthcoming state of the art wargaming center at Marine Corps Base Quantico reflects the service's embrace of wargaming, both as an educational and analytical tool. ...

Determining the Cause of War

In my early days at the Pentagon, working for the Joint Chiefs, we built and ran conflict simulations. But we were less interested in causes than we were in outcomes.  At the time we would have said the causes are too many, too complex, too subtle to control even for a simulation.

" ... DARPA, BAE Systems and the Air Force Research Lab are working to pioneer new computer simulations, algorithms and advanced software to provide military decision makers with organized, near real-time information on causes of war and conflict in operational scenarios. .... "

Can DARPA & BAE-Developed Computer Algorithms Determine the True Causes of War?   An emerging computer simulation analyzes multiple factors to determine the cause of war

By Kris Osborn - Warrior Maven

DARPA, BAE Systems and the Air Force Research Lab are working to pioneer new computer simulations, algorithms and advanced software to provide military decision makers with organized, near real-time information on causes of war and conflict in operational scenarios.

Drawing upon a range of otherwise disconnected sources of raw data, the new software program is designed to use reasoning algorithms and simulations to analyze intelligence reports, academic theories, environmental factors and details from operational scenarios and other kinds of user input.

“It is about taking information from disparate sources which would be impossible for a person to consume in a short amount of time,” Jonathan Goldstein, Senior Principal Scientist, Autonomy Controls and Estimation, BAE Systems, told Warrior Maven in an interview.

The Air Force Research Laboratory recently awarded a $4.2 million deal to BAE Systems to develop CONTEXT; DARPA is sponsoring BAE's efforts.

The emerging product, called Causal Exploration of Complex Operational Environments (CONTEXT) models different political, territorial and economic tensions that often cause conflict. These nodes, or variables making up a complex, yet interwoven tapestry of causes, include things like economic tensions, terrorism, tribal or religious conflict and issues about resources or territorial disputes – among other things.

“The technology evaluates causal insertions in different forms and innovates them into a model of interwoven causal relationships present in otherwise disconnected sources. We are building a model that can rapidly be used by an expert, so that when a new conflict flares up, decision-makers can understand the underlying issues,” Goldstein said.

While on the surface, organizing and performing some analytics of large pools of data might bring AI to mind, CONTEXT evaluates material input by users and does not necessarily access massive volumes of historical or stored data. Nonetheless, it does appear to perform some measure of automation and AI like functions, in so far as it organizes and integrates different sources for a human decision maker.

“This shortens the decision cycle. People are not good at maintaining a causal model with complexity in their head. The software creates a large graph of causes, evaluates approaches and examines the potential consequences of a given approach,” Goldstein explained.

Automation and AI, which are of course progressing at near lighting speed these days, are often described in terms of easing the “cognitive burden,” meaning they can quickly perform analytics and a range of procedural functions to present to a human operating in a command control capacity.

At the same time, causes of conflict are often a complex byproduct of a range of more subjectively determined variables – impacted by concepts, personalities, individual psychology, historical nuances and larger sociological phenomena. This naturally raises the question as to how much even the most advanced computer programs could account for these and other somewhat less “tangible” factors.

Leading AI and cybersecurity experts often say that advanced computer algorithms can analyze data and quickly perform procedural functions far more quickly than human cognition – yet there are nonetheless still many things which are known to be unique to human cognition. Humans solve problems, interpret emotions and at times respond to certain variables in a way that the best computer technology cannot.

“War causation is always over determined. Even with advanced statistical regressions on extremely large data sets, it is unlikely that what causes conflict can be determined with accuracy,” Ross Rustici, Senior Director, Intelligence Services, Cybereason – and former DoD Cyber Lead Intrusion Analyst and Technical Lead for DoD, East Asia, told Warrior Maven.  .... "

War Gaming for Training

Like the idea, we never made it formal, but tested the concept driven by competition.

Is your team’s new engineer ready to take on-call? Use wargames for training  By  Jeffrey Starr

At Qualtrics, our engineering organization is expanding rapidly. For my team, Text Analytics, we’ve gone from four to eight members in less than six months and there are more coming. As team members come in, part of the on-boarding process is preparing them to take on-call. The on-call engineer is the first responder for incidents — responsible for either resolving the issue or escalating the issue if they need help. Culturally, we’ve decided that teams are responsible for the systems they build to promote ownership and solving of maintainability issues.

To be ready for on-call rotation, a team member must:

- be familiar with our processes,
- have certain accounts, permissions, and tools, and
- be competent to diagnose and correct problems in our tech stack. .... " 

War Gaming Innovation Strategy

Battle testing an innovation strategy.  In the McKinsey  Quarterly.    This does remind me of defense department approaches, that were reimplemented in big enterprise.  Essentially a simulation approach.  Possibly  with game theoretic additionas.  Though this has been done typically for tactical rather than innovation goals.  " ... By simulating the thoughts, plans, and actions of competitors, these companies are improving their products and services, while gaining a deeper understanding of how their innovation assets compare with those of rivals—insights that help them better identify, shape, and seize opportunities.   ... "