Requirements of an ITS/Simulation Interoperability Standard (I/SIS)

Presented by: Dick StottlerStottler Henke Associates, Inc.stottler@stottlerhenke.com

Brian SpauldingMÄK Technologies, Inc.bspaulding@mak.com

2004 Fall SIW

Overview Problem Description Helicopter ITS Case Study, Simulation Supports ITS

Integration Requirements Implemented Integration Solution

General Requirements of I/SIS Battle Command ITS Case Study, ITS Supports Sim.

Simulation Driven Interface Integration Requirements Implemented Integration Solution

Proposed I/SIS Direction

Problem DescriptionITSs integrated with Tactical Simulations

ITS: Automated Tutor (evaluation, tailored instruction) Looks over student’s shoulder during simulated scenarios

ITSs and Simulations are from Different Developers ITS needs access to ALL student actions

Not just those observable outside his simulated platform E.G. Plans, orders, comms, internal software use

ITS may need to start simulation with a scenario ITS may need to control some parts of the scenario ITS may need mechanism for feedback in simulation Simulation may need mechanism to start ITS Simulation may need to select evaluations

Helicopter ITS Case StudyDescription

Teaches beginner helicopter pilots during flight exercises Instruction includes real-time coaching and AAR Coaching is multi-level

Initially observations of problems Direct attention by “flashing” instruments If student fails to correct, coaching becomes more directive Beginners get more & more detailed coaching than advanced

ITS plans instruction, assigns exercises Based on mastery and personality attributes

ITS interfaced to Microsoft Flight Simulator ITS in control and is main application to the student

Helicopter ITS Case StudyIntegration Requirements

Start MSFC with ITS assigned scenario Monitor helicopter states and pilot inputs Present Coaching/AAR

Audio Text Flashing instruments Graphics

Take control of wild helicopter ITS/MSFS coordinated scenario/evaluation entry ITS/MSFS coordinated feedback authoring/presentation Consistent interface across simulations

Helicopter ITS Case StudyImplemented Integration Solution

Flight Simulator Universal Inter-Process Communication (FSUIPC)

Shared memory paradigm (virtual) Specific memory locations can be retrieved or set Actually consists of .dll in MSFS & c++ code in ITS

2 FSUIPC components communicate across processes Capabilities/interface provided are ad hoc and unique

Flashing instruments done outside of FSUIPC Student directed to start MSFC with specific scenarios Simulated out-of-control helicopter was reset ITS interfaced to others by rewriting interface module Formalized API for interfacing to simulators Different simulators, different capabilities/interface/ITS

General I/SIS Requirements ITS access to student actions (ex/internal) Presenting real-time coaching and AAR ITS/Simulation coordinated scenario start Scenario control Other possible:

Additional scenario info needed by ITS for evaluation ITS driven replay ITS interactivity, e.g. Socratic dialog Consistent User IDs between ITS and simulation

Battle Command ITS Case StudyDescription

Army Tactical trainer Enables commanders

and staff officers to practice planning and execution skills

Plan, fight and review battle

HLA-compliant Single- or multi-player MILSTD-2525B

tactical graphics

Battle Command ITS Case StudySimulation-Driven ITS Interface

From simulation-driven perspective Accessory available to support and enhance simulation

training objectives Could be interactive real-time feedback or evaluation

engine available at completion or at pre-defined stages Should be transparent

Seamlessly embedded and consistent with GUI

Overall goal to augment basic functionality with intelligent evaluation, hinting, and debriefing capabilities and to provide more effective training environment

Battle Command ITS Case StudyIntegration Requirements

Goal – use ITS to enhance learning experience Planning

Provide feedback, either interactively during planning or at end by evaluating completed plan

Execution Could be used to evaluate trainee’s performance

AAR Automatically generate time-stamped text to annotate key

events Provide positive feedback or identify specific time where poor

decision was made

Battle Command ITS Case StudyImplemented Integration Solution

ITS and BC-2010 existed as separate applications Separate window containing buttons to evaluate plan and

execution results Not optimal approach (done as 1st step due to limited funding and

time) Demonstrated additional value of incorporating ITS

User interactions Prepared plan, ask ITS to evaluate plan, repeat if necessary When execution complete, ask ITS to review performance Feedback displayed as text in browser

All communication via HLA (RPR FOM) Platform and Aggregate details, fire/detonate interactions Proprietary VR-Forces data (tactical graphics, tasking) Neutral graphics to define “correct” solutions

Proposed I/SIS DirectionHLA Based

Standardized constructs to encapsulate unit and vehicles positions and time-varying status Platform and Aggregate details and interactions available in standard

FOMs (RPR, NTMF, etc.) Standardized definitions for planning objects (tactical graphics

or other planning documents) Good starting point - NTMF, C4I Reference FOM

Generalized mechanisms to define structured tasks or other C4I messages Battle Management Language

Mechanism to define measures of performance and identify correct solutions

AAR Support Structures to define data recording insert time-stamped annotations