technology today 2005 issue 4 - Raytheon
technology today 2005 issue 4 - Raytheon
technology today 2005 issue 4 - Raytheon
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
ARCHITECTURE & SYSTEMS INTEGRATION<br />
onTechnology<br />
<strong>Raytheon</strong><br />
Fort Wayne<br />
Showcases<br />
Key Net-centric<br />
Technologies<br />
Today’s modern battlespace is highlycomplex<br />
and requires a network-centric<br />
capability. The amount of complex data<br />
available to the modern warfighter is so<br />
prolific that it can be overwhelming.<br />
Therefore, effective automated information<br />
management is vital to success in this new<br />
warfare environment. New methods for<br />
dealing with large amounts of data need to<br />
be developed so that the warfighter has the<br />
information they need — when they need<br />
it. Tools to help the warfighter assimilate<br />
that data and make accurate, timely decisions<br />
are also a necessity.<br />
<strong>Raytheon</strong> Fort Wayne, Ind., has identified<br />
several key technologies that support the<br />
The Fort Wayne Capabilities Demonstration Team<br />
integration of both legacy and next-generation<br />
systems into the future battlespace.<br />
These include ontologies, intelligent<br />
agents, information and data fusion,<br />
automated decision-making, interactive<br />
planning, adversarial planning and<br />
cognitive radios.<br />
Our work with ontologies and intelligent<br />
agents began with the Common Relevant<br />
Operational Picture (CROP) research and<br />
development project. This effort laid the<br />
foundation for applying agent <strong>technology</strong><br />
to determine situational relevance and provide<br />
the warfighter with enhanced decisionmaking<br />
capabilities. A key driver of this<br />
project was to define an ontology, or standard<br />
vocabulary, that represented the<br />
Command and Control problem space for<br />
the notional “Battle of Ault Park”. The<br />
ontology consisted of the domain objects<br />
and their relationships and was developed<br />
using the DARPA Agent Markup Language<br />
with the Ontology Inference Layer<br />
(DAML+OIL). The purpose of the ontology<br />
was to provide a machine-readable standard<br />
vocabulary that was used to build a knowledge<br />
base representing the specifics of the<br />
Ault Park scenario. Software agents used<br />
the knowledge base to make decisions<br />
about the data in the problem domain.<br />
These decisions went beyond static filtering;<br />
they added a cognitive aspect by providing<br />
a mechanism to add contextual reasoning<br />
and the potential to learn from past experience<br />
or prior knowledge. The CROP effort<br />
gave <strong>Raytheon</strong> Fort Wayne hands-on experience<br />
working with ontologies and intelligent<br />
agents. Plans are ongoing to evolve<br />
CROP to enhance our understanding and<br />
identify specific applications within our<br />
production systems.<br />
The second evolution of ontology work<br />
resulted in a study of automated policy.<br />
This project is funded by the <strong>Raytheon</strong> IDEA<br />
program. The Automated Policy project is<br />
evaluating the feasibility and flexibility of<br />
automated policy by prototyping a notional<br />
system that uses an ontology to describe<br />
the policies’ rules and relationships, a fact<br />
base that describes the current situation of<br />
the domain, and an inference engine that<br />
reasons on both the ontology and the fact<br />
base to derive the proper course of action.<br />
A policy-enabled capability can benefit a<br />
system that is complex (e.g., one that<br />
requires great expertise in a subject matter)<br />
and/or dynamic. It does this by separating<br />
the policies from the software. This separation<br />
allows for not only a more dynamic<br />
environment, but also keeps the policies<br />
closer to the policy makers. Some examples<br />
of military policy include Commander’s<br />
Guidance, Rules of Engagement and<br />
Course of Action. Military commanders use<br />
policy to allow or restrict missions, pair<br />
weapons with targets, allocate airspace,<br />
and request coordination, among others<br />
uses. Other examples of policy include<br />
security management, spectrum management<br />
and policies governing role-based<br />
access to information. The Automated<br />
Policy project supports <strong>Raytheon</strong> Fort<br />
Wayne in determining how this knowledge<br />
can be applied within our production<br />
systems.<br />
20 <strong>2005</strong> ISSUE 4 RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGY TODAY YESTERDAY…TODAY…TOMORROW