Modelling Multi-Domain C2 with network synchronisation: testing a NATO-SAS-143 hypothesis (Paper #57)

Dr Alexander Kalloniatis

Human & Decision Sciences Division/

Agile C2 STaR Shot

Defence Science & Technology Group

​

• NATO-SAS-143, Harmonisation and Hypotheses
• Network synchronisation review
• Measuring Harmonisation
• Multi-Domain C2 Scenario
• Testing the Hypothesis
• Insights and Conclusions

Overview

• Multi-Domain C2/Harmonisation seeks to avoid conflicts and enable synergies within, between, and among entities conducting operations in multiple domains, and the effects that these operations create.
• For multi-domain operations (eg Cyber, Information, WoG), there is no Unity of Command possible for a military Commander.

​

• Hypothesis: Command and Control -Harmonisation Arrangements (C2-H) H5: C2-H arrangements that involve more networked C2 approaches and higher levels of harmonization cost more.

​

​

OFFICIAL

NATO-SAS-143 Multi-Domain C2 ‘Harmonisation’

A Commander cannot force all organisations/entities to be at the same point in the C2 Approach Space

The Kuramoto Model (1984): application to C2 - ICCRTS 2008

Measure of synchronisation:

Low σ: “Loosely Coupled”

High σ: “Tightly Coupled”

Spontaneous synchronisation through network interactions

Organisational Interactions

Tightness of Organisational Coupling

Frequency of decision-making when left to self.

Rate of progress through decision cycle

t

t

Formulation as full stochastic D.E. with HQ C2 data:

Kalloniatis, McLennan-Smith & Roberts,

European J O.R. 2020

β

Kuramoto application I: Blue-vs-Red - ICCRTS 2012

‘Frustrations’ (cf Cond. Matt.)

Boyd:

Blue seeks to be φ ahead of Red;

Red seeks to be ψ ahead of Blue.

• Represent adversarial C2 relationships to reflect Boyd’s decision advantage strategy

Kalloniatis & Zuparic, Physica A, 2016

Kuramoto Application 2: �Modelling Sociotechnical Systems - ICCRTS 2016

• Represent J2, J3 and Command staff interacting with information artefacts in maintaining SA and responding to crises

​

​

Based on data collected in ADF – see Kalloniatis et al Applied Ergonomics 2017

​

Kalloniatis et al, EJOR 2020

Measure degree of synchronisation of sub-organisations:

Kuramoto Application 3: � Nested Decision cycles - ICCRTS 2017

• Unify slower operational planning cycles with faster reactive operational execution cycles

​

​

UNCLASSIFIED

Planning

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Execution

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Degree of

Synchronisation of sub-organisations

Strength of coupling

Branches are not ‘optimal’ at some point – network can influence this

Application 4: MDO-C2 – ICCRTS 2019/MORS2018

Unifying two Warfighting Functions: C2 and Fires/Effects

Linking Kuramoto & Lanchester

• Temporal networks based on B2C2WG interactions

​

• Addition of Fatigue Factors

OFFICIAL

ATO-Day

AA

ATO-Day

AB

ATO-Day

AC

ATO-Day

AD

Application 5: Battle-Rhythm – ICCRTS 2020; ModSim2021; MORS 2022; ICCRTS 2022

OFFICIAL

Multi-Domain C2: Organisations

• Joint Task Force (JTF) – organised by Common Joint Staff System lines

​

• Air Operations Centre (AOC) – see Wikipedia

​

• Communications HQ (CommsHQ) – fictitious NSA/GCHQ like

​

• Digital Information Officer Agency (DIOA)

​

• Australian Humanitarian Assistance Agency (AUSHAA) – fictitious

The scenario depicted here is a work of fiction; organisations, roles and processes are either the products of the author's imagination or used in a fictitious manner; any resemblance to actual organisations, roles or processes is purely coincidental

Multi-Domain C2

‘Slow’ C2 process: deliberate planning

‘Fast’ C2 process: reactive crisis planning

Symmetric

Source and sink both try to sync

Red C2 not modelled here, but can be.

Sync of tactical air, mar and land pictures

JTF

AOC

AUSHAA

DIOA

CommsHQ

N=77, E=145

The Joint Commander

-- does not Command all

Ext Coupling

OFFICIAL

Integrating Civil-Military Cooperation

• Blue and Red engage militarily: internal synchronisation enhances performance in combat.

​

​

​

• Humanitarian assistance agency supports local population: synchronisation with military authorities enables deconfliction between humanitarian and military activities.

​

• Poor Blue force military synchronisation inflicts collateral damage.

Alexander C. Kalloniatis, Keeley Hoek, Mathew Zuparic & Markus

Brede (2021) Optimising structure in a networked Lanchester model for fires and manoeuvre in warfare, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 72:8, 1863-1878, DOI:10.1080/01605682.2020.1745701

​

Ryan Ahern, Mathew Zuparic, Keeley Hoek & Alexander Kalloniatis (2021): Unifying warfighting functions in mathematical modelling: Combat, manoeuvre, and C2, Journal of the Operational Research Society, DOI: 10.1080/01605682.2021.1956379

​

Timothy A. McLennan-Smith , Alexander C. Kalloniatis , Zlatko Jovanoski , Harvinder S. Sidhu , Dale O. Roberts , Simon Watt , Isaac N. Towers (2021) A Mathematical Model of Humanitarian Aid Agencies in Attritional Conflict Environments. Operations Research, 29 Jul 2021, . https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2021.2130

​

​

This is the simplest of models available

• Getting it wrong for years…

OFFICIAL

Coupling Normalisation

• Measure system at fixed coupling value:

Coupling is effortful:

both internally (to an organisation) and externally (to others).

​

The more you interact with, both input & output, the more you dissipate effort.

​

Kalloniatis & McLennan-Smith, 2023 (submitted to Phys. Rev. E.)

​

• Definition ‘Local Harmonisation’ between two Actors A, B using local measure of synchronisation:

​

​

​

​

​

​

UNOFFICIAL

Measuring C2 Harmonisation

Baseline C2

Minimum Threshold

Victory Threshold

Maximum Threshold

• h=0 – good harmonisation (white)
• h=1 – poor harmonisation (black)

… when r is above min.threshold ~0.85

• Introduce random links to baseline model

​

​

​

OFFICIAL

Testing Hypothesis C2-H 5

E=145+100

N=77, E=145

Stalemate Boundary smoother; Victory region convex

• Synchronisation outcomes

​

​

OFFICIAL

Testing Hypothesis C2-H 5

E=Baseline=145

E=Baseline + 20

E=Baseline + 100

E=Baseline + 250

E=Baseline + 700

E=Baseline + 1100

* r=0.85

‘Sweet Spot’

OFFICIAL

Baseline + 100

E=Baseline

E=Baseline + 100

Minimum Threshold

Victory Threshold

Maximum Threshold

Local (pairwise) Harmonisation

* r=0.85

* r=0.85

OFFICIAL

Global Harmonisation

• ‘Global Harmonisation’ Measure across whole system

More networking more cost

More networking: plateau in harmonisation

Wasted Effort

• Results consistent with hypothesis … to a point
• Some more networking is good! NCW told us that!

​

• The right amount of networking within and across organisations in multi-domain C2 is key when there is no central ‘commander’ to drive synchrony as a whole
• Targeted new links: criticality of information/processes; Adaptive links.

​

• Increase statistical sampling to test robustness, although ‘real operational C2’ will always only be one instance of an ensemble

​

• Use Calibrated Coupling
• Kalloniatis & McLennan-Smith: calibration to Max. Team Size: Validation against Max. Span of Control

​

• Broader Harmonisation measures
• Detach non-kinetic and kinetic objectives from dynamics – harmonization will be harder

​

• Introduce Non-Human Intelligent Collaborators (NIC/Autonomy) in C2 system

​

Insights and Future Work