1 Ward Page CPOF Program Manager DARPA Richard Hayes President Evidence Based Research www.ebrinc.com William Wright Principal Investigator DARPA CPOF Visual Insights Inc. By Permission Command Post of the Future imited Objective Experiment - One (LOE- Some Results
Overview of the Army Command Post of the Future (CPOF) system. A basic little course of instruction that will widen a users understanding of the features of the CPOF.
Citation preview
Command Post of the Future Limited Objectives Experiment 1
ResultsSome Results
were provided by Ward Page and Dick Hayes.
Acknowledgement
Limited Objective Experiments
4th Infantry Division
Ft. Hood, TX
Disjointed data systems; fragmented pictures of the
battlefield
No portrayal of uncertainties, inconsistencies or unknowns
Requires too many people, too much communication
Consequences
Incomplete, inaccurate understanding of the battlefield
Delayed decisions while waiting for more data, understanding
Mismatch between available data and Commander’s cognitive
model.
*
Operational Impact
Faster and more complete exploration of available courses of
action
More rapid and more accurate dissemination of commands
Smaller, More Mobile Command Structures
Fewer staff members
More mobile, distributed command organizations
Increased Span of Control
*
Command Post of the Future (CPOF) is a DARPA program that aims
to:
Increase Speed and Quality of Command Decisions
Faster recognition and better understanding of changing battlefield
situation
Faster and more complete exploration of available courses of
action
Provide More Effective Dissemination of Commands
COA capture for dissemination of commander’s intent
Status and capability feedback from deployed operators
Enable Smaller, More Mobile and Agile Command Structures
More mobile, distributed command element
Smaller support tail & reduced deployment requirements
The goal of CPOF is to shorten the commander’s decision cycle to
stay ahead of the adversary’s ability to react.
Command Post of the Future
*
Enabling a New Interface Metaphor for C2 After Next
Visualization and Human-Computer Interaction
*
Tailored Visualizations
Immediate Understanding
Data => Information => Knowledge
Intuitive visual presentations
Decision-Centered
Uncover battlespace patterns
Trial Matrix
Trial Conditions
MOE:
Quality of Pattern Recognition
Insurgency
Significant preparatory activity in Port-au-Prince
Military activity only in the North
Dormant South
Increase in preparatory activity (last 9 weeks)
Decrease in civil activity
Low level military activity
Very active recruiting
Arms shipment
CPOF strongest in complex situations
CPOF strongest in force-on-force situations
CPOF strongest in understanding adversary’s situation
Different Strengths Emerged from Alternative CPOF
technologies
Treatment B strongest where force ratio is important in
force-on-force scenarios
Treatment A strongest in overall sketch scores in insurgency
situations
Treatment A strongest in overall Situation Awareness scores in
insurgency situations
Significant Findings
Time Issues and Others
Some changes due to control scores getting worse rather than CPOF
scores greatly improving
Time appeared to help in case where visualization technique
introduced new concept
Longer viewing time did not always result in higher scores
Significant Findings (cont.)
CPOF Technologies performance improves for prompted
CPOF Technologies Significantly
Prompted
23.89
25.62
21.41
33.86
Interpretation
Better situation awareness (higher mean or x) in complex
situations
Unprompted
Prompted
6.28
18.53
3.95
17.24
Significantly better situation awareness than Control for both
prompted and unprompted in Force-on-Force situations
Control
Treatment B Vs. Control
Treatments A and B significantly outperformed control in
representing enemy force information
Treatment A Vs. Control
*
Treatment B outperforms Treatment A in Overall Situation Awareness
in Situation 13
15.93
15.00
22.93
12.21
14.85
12.06
29.66
12.71
s
Interpretation
that subjects stated was confusing.
Unprompted
Prompted
in Insurgency Situations
Overall Sketch Score
Prompted Situational Awareness
17.13
72.20
16.21
64.87
x
(Percent of instances where time did not help, when
significant
differences between times were found)
Interpretation
*
*
CPOF experimental approach captures the strengths and
weaknesses
CPOF technologies appear to improve subjects’ overall Situation
Awareness when compared to traditional methods
CPOF experimental approach captures strengths and weaknesses of
each treatment
Summary
Simple
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
135
Minutes
% Correct