Xmsf and enabling dod m s capability
1 / 10

XMSF and Enabling DoD M&S Capability - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Updated On :

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:

Related searches for XMSF and Enabling DoD M&S Capability

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'XMSF and Enabling DoD M&S Capability' - andrew

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Xmsf and enabling dod m s capability l.jpg


XMSFandEnabling DoD M&S Capability

DMSO Perspective


Phil Zimmerman, Associate Director

The vision l.jpg
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 l.jpg
DoD M&S Strategy:An Analogy to City Planning




All simulations and

live interfaces



Common Technical Framework

  • 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 l.jpg
Extending InteroperabilityThe HLA Architecture

Interfaces toLive Players

Support Utilities




Runtime Infrastructure (RTI)

Federation Management Declaration Management

Object Management Ownership Management

Time Management Data Distribution Management

  • Architecture specifies

    • Ten Rules which define relationships among federation components

    • An Object Model Templatewhich specifies the formin which simulation elements are described

    • An Interface Specificationwhich describes the way simulations interact during operation

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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
Necessarybut 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 l.jpg
Semantic Consistency:Common Understanding

  • Lexical

    • Common vocabulary, data types


  • 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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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 l.jpg
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