tek.hİz.: 27698691-0570- -18/arge ve teknj.d....

HİZMETE ÖZEL EK-A TEK.HİZ.: 27698691-0570- -18/ARGE ve Teknj.D. Hab. ve Rd.Sis.Ş.Md. Aralık 2018

HİZMETE ÖZEL A-1

GÖREV SONUÇ RAPORU

1. TOPLANTININ KONUSU : NATO Bilişim Sistemleri Teknoloji (Information Systems

Technology, IST) Panelinin 2018 Yılı Sonbahar Toplantısı

2. TOPLANTININ YERİ : Lizbon/PORTEKİZ

3. TOPLANTININ TARİHİ : 15-19 Ekim 2018

4. TOPLANTIYA KATILANLAR:

NATO Bilim ve Teknoloji Organizasyonu (Science and Technology Organization-STO)

bünyesinde faaliyet gösteren Bilgi Sistemleri Teknoloji (Information Systems Technology-IST)

Panelinin 42’nci toplantısı, 15-19 Ekim 2018 tarihleri arasında Lizbon/Portekiz’de icra edilmiştir.

Söz konusu toplantıya Türkiye’den Panel Üyeleri (Müh.Yzb. S.Çağrı DEVECİOĞLU-MSB,

Hv.Müh.Bnb. Hayati EROL-Gnkur.Bşk.lığı) katılım sağlamıştır.

5. TOPLANTIDA GÖRÜŞÜLEN HUSUSLAR VE ALINAN KARARLAR:

Toplantıda IST Panelinde devam eden faaliyetler gözden geçirilmiş, teklif edilen faaliyetlere

ilişkin bilgilendirme yapılmış ve bu faaliyetlerle ilgili yapılan oylamaya iştirak edilmiştir. Bu

kapsamda;

a. CSO (Collaboration Support Office – İşbirliği Destek Ofisi) Md.Yrd. Emekli General Roger

RENARD tarafından, “Altı Aylık STO Faaliyetlerine Genel Bakış” konulu, NATO ve STB (Science

and Technology Board – Bilim ve Teknoloji Kurulu) düzeyinde vurgulanan hususlar ile Ortak

Programların geliştirilmesine yönelik CSO Direktörü Durum Raporu ve bu raporun Paneller ile ilgili

sonuçlarına yönelik hususları içeren EK-A LAHİKA 1’deki sunum yapılmıştır. STO’nun mevcut

durumda 3 ana konsepti; “Otonomi”, “Askeri Karar Alma Süreci için Büyük Veri ve Yapay Zeka” ve

“Hilaflı Bölgelerde Meskun Muharebe Harekatı”ndan oluşmaktadır.

b. ACT (Allied Command Transformation - Müttefik Dönüşüm Komutanlığı) temsilcisi

tarafından; “Yeni ve Çığır Açan Teknolojiler için ACT Çalışmaları” konulu sunum Pazartesi sabahı

gerçekleştirilmiştir. Söz konusu sunumda 2019 yılı Yeni ve Çığır Açan Teknolojiler Yol Haritası EK-

A LAHİKA 2 slayt 14’te, ACT tarafından başlatılan Otonomi Projelerine ait takvim EK-A LAHİKA 2

slayt 15 ‘te bahsedilmiştir.

c. Yarbay Paulo Rodrigues DIAS tarafından, Müşterek Analiz ve Alınan Dersler Merkezi

(Joint Analysis Lessons Learned Center - JALLC) adına “Alınan Dersler Konusunda NATO’nun

Lider Ajansı, JALLC” konulu sunum gerçekleştirilmiştir. Söz konusu sunumda; Alınan Derslere

yönelik NATO’daki yenilikler, Alınan Dersler bağlamına etki eden faktörler, mevcut Alınan Dersler

portalı ile 2025 yılında kullanıma hazır hale gelecek yeni portal hususlarında detaylı bilgiler

verilmiştir.

ç. Peter LENK tarafından NCIA (NATO Communications and Information Agency – NATO

Haberleşme ve Bilgi Ajansı) hakkında; genel bilgi, mevcut projeler, S&T ile ilgili önemli hususlar ile

eğitim ve harekatı desteklemedeki rolü hususlarına yönelik sunum yapılmıştır. Bu kapsamda,

mevcut NCIA Veri Bilimi Projeleri EK-A LAHİKA-3 slayt 7’de, Propaganda Tespitine (Halihazırda

icra edilen ve gelecekte icra edilecek IST çalışmaları için ilgi çekici nitelikte olan) yönelik hususlar

ise EK-A LAHİKA-3 slayt 13’te detaylandırılmıştır.


HİZMETE ÖZEL A-2

d. Peter LENK tarafından ICMCIS 2019 ile ilgili genel bilgilere yönelik sunum yapılmıştır.

ICMCIS 2019’a ait web sitesine “http://www.icmcis2019.me” adresinden ulaşılmaktadır. ICMCIS

2020 (Hollanda’da icra edilecektir) ile birlikte yapılacak planlamaların; söz konusu faaliyetin hazırlık

sürecinin iyi bir şekilde gerçekleşmesine olanak tanıyacağı değerlendirilmiştir. IST Panel Başkanı

M.WUNDER tarafından IST faaliyetlerinden gelen taleplerin uygun bir şekilde belirtildiğinden emin

olunması hususu, ICMCIS idare komitesinde görevli IST Panel üyelerinden (Wim Mees, Markus

Antweiller) talep edilmiştir.

e. 18 Ekim 2018 Perşembe günü IST Paneli Slovenya ve Portekiz üyeleri (Oy Verme

Yetkisine Sahip) tarafından ülkelerinin S&T önceliklerine yönelik sunum yapılmıştır.

f. IST Panel Başkanı, Edinburg’da icra edilen 2018 yılı Güz dönemi STB toplantısında

görüşülen Otonomi, Büyük Veri ve Yapay Zeka ile Meskun Mahal Harekatı konularına yönelik

hususları aktarmıştır. Odak Gruplarından Bilimsel Başarı Ödülü ve Panel Ödülü adaylarına yönelik

değerlendirme yapılması talep edilmiştir.

g. Odak Grup liderleri başlangıç oturumlarına yönelik kendi faaliyetleri ile ilgili sunum

yapmışlardır. IST üyeleri tarafından oylanacak TAP (Technical Activity Proposal – Teknik Faaliyet

Önerisi)’ların ön seçimi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu kapsamda MSB Temsilcisi tarafından da “Trusted

Mobile Instant Messaging to Support Coordination of NATO Military Personnel on Missions” konulu

TAP’IN detaylarını anlatan bir sunum gerçekleştirilmiştir. Söz konusu TAP’ın gelecek dönemlerde

başlatılması planlanan çalışmalar içerisinde değerlendirilmesi uygun bulunmuştur.

ğ. Ayrıca ilgili ülke temsilcileri tarafından halihazırda yürütülen IST panel faaliyetlerine

yönelik sunumlar gerçekleştirilmiştir. Konu ile ilgili, liderliği Türkiye tarafından yürütülen IST-ET-103

nolu gurubun faaliyetlerinin durdurulması (Diğer ülkeler tarafından yeterli katılım sağlanmaması

gerekçesiyle) hususunda Türkiye tarafından yapılan teklif uygun bulunmuştur.

h. Önceki yıllarda PBM (Panel Bussiness Meeting – Panel Yönetim Toplantısı) yerinin

belirlenmesi hususunun panelden kısa süre öncesinde ele alınmasından kaynaklı büyük sorunlar

yaşanması sebebiyle, IST Panel Başkanı uzun dönemli bir plan yapılmasını önermiştir.

(1) Toplantı takvimi;

(a) 43’üncü PBM Bahar Toplantısı (Karadağ / 13-17 Mayıs 2019),

(b) 44’üncü PBM Güz Toplantısı (Macaristan),

(c) 45’inci PBM Bahar Toplantısı (Hollanda),

(ç) 46’ıncı PBM Güz Toplantısı (İtalya’dan teyit edilmesi, özel bir lokasyon bildirilmesi

talep edilmiştir.),

(d) 47’inci PBM Bahar Toplantısı (Portekiz, NCIA ve ICMCIS tarafından teyit edilmesi

talep edilmiştir.),

(e) 48’inci PBM Güz Toplantısı (Almanya, Resmi olarak teyit edilmesine ihtiyaç

duyulmaktadır.),

http://www.icmcis2019.me/


HİZMETE ÖZEL A-3

(f) 49’uncu PBM Bahar Toplantısı (Slovakya, Çekya ve İsveç aday ülkelerdir.),

(g) 50’inci PBM Güz Toplantısı (İsveç aday ülkedir.) şeklinde öngörülmektedir.

(2) Etkinlik ile ilgili organizasyonunun kaliteli ve yeterli katılımla icra edilebilmesi

maksadıyla, faaliyete ev sahipliği yapan ülke tarafından; iştirak ettiği bir RTG (Research Task

Group – Araştırma Görev Grubu) faaliyeti belirlemesi ve kendi ulusal ilgi alanlarını tema alan bir

faaliyet icra etmesi talep edilmiştir. Ev sahipliği yapan ülke tarafından organizasyona yeterli derece

katılım sağlanması ve faaliyette kullanılacak bildiri/sunumların toplanmasının zorunlu olması

gerektiği bildirilmiştir.

(3) Ayrıca IST Panel Başkanı tarafından; sıkıntı yaşanan faaliyetlerin düşük kaliteli

olarak değerlendirildiğinden, bu şekildeki faaliyetler olmaksızın PBM toplantıları

gerçekleştirilmesinin daha uygun olduğu hususu dile getirilmiştir. Bu durum, genellikle Güz PBM

toplantıları ICMCIS (International Conference on Military Communications and Information

Systems – Askeri Haberleşme ve Bilgi Sistemleri Uluslararası Konferansı) faaliyetleri ile birlikte icra

edildiğinden özellikle Güz PBM toplantıları açısından önem arz etmektedir.

ı. Stratejik Planlama Komitesi ile ilgili hususlara yönelik olarak;

(1) Faaliyetlerin Kalitesinin Artırılması:

(a) Yüksek kalitede gerçekleştirilemediği takdirde yılda iki defa toplantı icra edilmesi

hususunda ısrar etmeye gerek duyulmadığı,

(b) ICMCIS’in icra şeklinin öğrenilmesi ve gelecekte bir inceleme sürecine yönelik

tanımlama yapılması,

(c) Değerlendirmelerde reddedilen faaliyet miktarlarının yükseltilmesi,

(ç) Yerel Askeri Üniversitelerin ve Araştırma Kuruluşlarının faaliyetlere dâhil

edilmesi,

(2) Ödüller:

(a) Bob MADAHAR tarafından, Nazife BAYKAL ile koordine edilerek ödül süreci

düzenlenmesi,

(b) Adaylar, Odak Grupları ve Panel üyelerince tavsiye edilebilmesi,

(c) Aday tavsiyesi için Ödül Komitesine verilmek üzere bir form doldurulması,

(3) Teknoloji İzleme Kartları:

(a) Karmaşık bir süreç olmaması,

(b) “ScienceConnect” paylaşım alanındaki ana dizinde bu konuya yönelik bir klasör

oluşturulması ve yeni hazırlanan kartların bu klasöre eklenmesi,


HİZMETE ÖZEL A-4

(c) Kartların paylaşımının hazırlayanın sorumluluğunda olduğu ve kartların

revizyonlari ile nihai hallerinin bütün paneller için “ScienceConnect” paylaşım alanından ulaşılabilir

olması,

(4) Müşterek Teknoloji Gösterimi:

Odak Gruplarından Müşterek Teknoloji Gösterimim için aday belirlenmesinin talep

edilmesi ve Grup liderleri ile CSO tarafından fonlama ile ilgili konularda daha aktif davranmalarının

talep edilmesi hususunda koordine kurulması,

(5) Genel Güvenlik Düzeyi:

Yeni hazırlanacak yayınların kolaylaştırılması kapsamında güvenlik düzeyi olarak

“NATO Tasnif Dışı” yerine “Kamuya Açık” olarak kullanılabileceği (Bazı kriterlerde güvenlik

sıkılaştırmaları yapmak kaydıyla),

(6) IST Panel Çalışmalarının Geliştirilmesi:

(a) Panel Toplantılarına Yeni Bir Bileşen Eklenmesi: Pazartesi öğleden sonra icra

edilecek oturumlarda Odak Grubu toplantıları yerine Beyin Fırtınası toplantıları icra edilmesi;

Pazartesi sabahları kısa bir giriş yapılarak 2-3 tema belirlenmesi; bahsi geçen temalar ile ilgili PBM

öncesinde fikirler oluşturulması,

(b) Faaliyet Raporları: Rapor sayısının azaltılması ve sonuç raporlarına faaliyet

çıktılarını daha detaylı görebilmek maksadıyla daha fazla zaman verilmesi; bu kapsamda ilgili

faaliyette görev alan personelin PBM’e davet edilerek panel üyeleri ile çıktılar üzerine görüşülmesi,

(c) Odak Grupları: AI2S Odak Grubuna katılımın düşük olması sebebiyle yeni bir

Odak Grup Yapısı yaklaşımına yönelik hususların müteakip toplantıda görüşülmesi,

(ç) Faaliyetlerin Raporlanması: Faaliyetlere yönelik istatistik değerlerin Odak Grup

liderleri tarafından raporlanması yerine Panel Yöneticisi (Panel Executive) tarafından takip

edilmesi,

(d) PBM takviminin toplantıdan en az altı hafta öncesinde netlik kazanması,

(e) “ScienceConnect” paylaşım alanındaki yeni klasörleme yapısına uygun hareket

edilmesi ve toplantı ile ilgili dokümantasyonun bu yapı içerisindeki klasörlerde bulundurulması

hususları görüşülmüştür.

i. Panelde teklif edilen, TAP dokümanları EK-A LAHİKA 4’te sunulan ve aşağıdaki konu

başlıkları verilen dokuz adet faaliyet oylamaya tabi tutulmuştur.

(1) Trust in Information (Bilgi Güvenirliği),

(2) Secure, Flexible, Interoperable, UnderWater Communications (Güvenli, Esnek,

Değiştirilebilir, Sualtı Muhaberesi),

(3) Communication in Contested EW Environment (Hilaflı Elektronik Harp Ortamında

Muhabere),


HİZMETE ÖZEL A-5

(4) Full Duplex Radio Technology for Military Applications (Askeri Uygulamalar için Tam

Çift Yönlü Radyo Teknolojisi),

(5) Social Media for Info Ops (Bilgi Harekatında Sosyal Medya),

(6) Federated Interoperability of Military C2 and IoT Systems (Askeri Komuta/Kontrol ve

Nesnelerin Interneti Sistemlerinin Birleştirilmiş Değiştirilebilirliği),

(7) Mission Oriented Research on AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making (Yapay

Zeka Konusunda Göreve Yönelik Araştırma ve Askeri Karar Alma Süreci için Büyük Veri),

(8) Big Data Challenges: Situation Awareness and Decision Support (Büyük Veri

Zorlukları: Durumsal Farkındalık ve Karar Destek Süreci),

(9) Cyber Psychology (Siber Psikoloji).

j. Yukarıda açıklaması yapılan dokuz adet faaliyete katılım ve destek verme hususunda

yapılan oylamada (Panel öncesinde ilgili Kurumlar, Savunma Sanayii ve Üniversiteler ile kurulan

koordinasyona istinaden) IST Paneli Türkiye temsilcisi olarak;

(1) “Secure, Flexible, Interoperable, UnderWater Communications”, “5G Technology

Investigations”, “Full Duplex Radio Technology for Military Applications”, “Social Media for Info

Ops”, “Federated Interoperability of Military C2 and IoT Systems”, “Mission Oriented Research on

AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making” ve “Big Data Challenges: Situation Awareness and

Decision Support” konulu faaliyetler için “BELKİ”,

(2) “Trust in Information” ve “Cyber Psychology” konulu faaliyetler için “HAYIR” şeklinde

görüş bildirilmiş,

(3) Panel dönüşüne müteakip ilgili Kurumlar, Savunma Sanayii ve Üniversiteler ile

kurulan koordinasyon sonucunda ise; “Mission Oriented Research on AI and Big Data for Military

Decision Making”, “5G Technology Investigations”, “Federated Interoperability of Military C2 and

IoT Systems” ve “Full Duplex Radio Technology for Military Applications” konulu faaliyetlere katılım

sağlanacağına yönelik NATO IST Panel yöneticisi ile koordinasyon kurulmuştur. Bahsi geçen

faaliyetlere katılacak personelin görevlendirilmesine yönelik süreç halihazırda devam etmektedir.

k. Ayrıca 43’üncü Panel toplantısı için Türkiye tarafından;

(1) “Blockchain Technology for Coalition Operations” (Ortak Yönetilen Harekatta

Blokzinciri Teknolojisi) konusunda TAP hazırlanması ve bu konuda sunum yapılması,

(2) Diğer paneller ile ele alınan ortak konuların araştırılması ve uygun olduğu takdirde bu

kapsamda icra edilebilecek faaliyete yönelik TAP hazırlanması planlanmaktadır.


HİZMETE ÖZEL A-6

6. SONUÇ VE TEKLIFLER

a. NATO STO bünyesindeki IST Panelinin 42’nci toplantısı 15-19 Ekim 2018 tarihleri arasında

Lizbon/Portekiz’de icra edilmiştir. Toplantıya Türkiye'den MSB ve Gnkur.Bşk.lığı temsilcileri katılım

sağlamıştır.

b. Anılan toplantıda panel bünyesinde yürütülen ve yeni başlatılması planlanan faaliyetler

gözden geçirilmiş ve söz konusu faaliyetlere ilişkin sunumlar yapılmıştır. 2019 ve takip eden yıllara

ait planlanan faaliyetler gözden geçirilmiştir.

c. Panelde yapılan değerlendirmelerde; “Otonomi”, “Askeri Karar Alma Süreci için Büyük Veri

ve Yapay Zeka” ve “Hilaflı Bölgelerde Meskun Muharebe Harekatı” konularına yoğunlaşılması

görüşülmüştür.

ç. Ana Bakım/Bakım Merkezi Komutanlıkları, Tersane Komutanlıkları, Hava İkmal Bakım

Merkezi Komutanlıkları tarafından milli olarak yürütülen uzun vadeli teknoloji faaliyetlerinin ve

harekat ihtiyaçlarının daha kısa sürede ve maliyet etkin şekilde karşılanabilmesi maksadıyla, IST

Paneli faaliyetlerinin takip edilmesinin uygun olacağı kıymetlendirilmektedir.

d. NATO STO bünyesinde teşkil edilmiş olan ve bilimsel içerikli konuların ele alındığı panel

faaliyetlerine katılım Türkiye’de sürdürülen/planlanan ARGE çalışmalarının yönlendirilmesi

bakımından önem arz etmektedir. Bu kapsamda panel faaliyetlerinin düzenli olarak takip edilerek,

üniversiteler, araştırma merkezleri/enstitüleri, savunma sanayii kurum/kuruluşları ile özel sektör

firmalarının bu tür platformlardaki çalışmalara (çalışma grubu, sempozyum, çalıştay, uzmanlar

toplantısı, ders serisi vb.) aktif olarak katılımının faydalı olacağı değerlendirilmektedir.

e. Teknik alt çalışmalara katılım, IST paneline dahil edilmesi gereken teknolojik önceliklere

ilişkin kurumsal/kişisel görüşler, bilgi ihtiyacı vb. konulardaki tekliflerin ARGE ve

Teknj.D.Bşk.lığından Müh.Yzb. S.Çağrı DEVECİOĞLU ([email protected]) ile

koordine edilmesinin faydalı olacağı değerlendirilmektedir.

Arz ederim.

(e-İmzalı)

S.Çağrı DEVECİOĞLU

Müh.Yzb.

IST Panel Üyesi

LAHİKALAR :

LAHİKA-1 (CSO Sunumu)

LAHİKA-2 (ACT Sunumu)

LAHİKA-3 (NCIA Sunumu)

LAHİKA-4 (IST Paneli Teknik Faaliyet Önerileri)

Fall 2018 Panel/Group Brief Semi-annual STO Business Overview

MG(ret’d) Roger RENARD On behalf of Dr Pavel Zuna

Director Collaboration Support Office

NATO UNCLASSIFIED Releasable to all Partners Slide 1 Fall 2018 P/G BMs

• NATO-Level Highlights

• Science & Technology Board (STB) Highlights

• CSO Director’s Status Report on Improving the Collaborative Program

• So What for Panels/Group

Outline


NATO-Level Highlights

• July Summit Highlights

• NDPP: starting a new cycle with Step 1 “Political Guidance”

• ACT’s Emerging & Disruptive Technologies Roadmap


• Selected Lines of Effort: – LoE 1 - Enhancing Decision Making including Information Environment

Assessment: Jun 18-Dec 20; – LoE 2 - Capability Development:

• Strategic Foresight Analysis (SFA)/ Framework for Future Alliance Operations (FFAO): Feb 19-Jan 20;

• Actionable Data for Defence Planning: Sep 18-Jul 19;

– LoE 3 – Enabling SACEUR’s AOR – NATO Shared Situational Awareness: Oct 18-Mar 19

• Enabling Lines of Effort: – Lessons Learned: Oct 18-early 19; – Autonomy: Oct 18-Dec 22 – Education, Training, Exercises and Evaluation (ETEE): Oct 18-Mar 21

• Priority on maximizing the use of already planned exercises and events for conducting demos and engaging all relevant stakeholders (e.g. STO, COEs)

ACT’s E&DT Roadmap Lines of Efforts

Fall 2018 P/G BMs NATO UNCLASSIFIED Releasable to all Partners Slide 8

• Approved NATO S&T Strategy – Implementation Status

• Strategic S&T Initiatives Update

• AFSC Status Report

• STO Technology Trends Report

• ACT Structured Partnership

• STO Themes

• 2019 Plans & Program Workshop

• 2019 STO Scientific Achievements Awards

STB Highlights


All read-ahead material & presentations are

available from STO Drive - STB

https://scienceconnect.sto.nato.int/apps/27630




Council approved – 27 July 2018

Fall 2018 P/G BMs NATO UNCLASSIFIED Releasable to all Partners Slide 10

Approved NATO S&T Strategy


Reminder

• Main impact on Panels/Group: – Investments in four areas:

• (1) enhance the network of experts;

– Nations to provide scientists and engineers with knowledge and skills in emergent S&T areas in order to broaden and deepen the knowledge base in the S&T programmes of work

• (2) intensify strategic communications;

• (3) improve the programmes of work (see next slide); and

• (4) promote coherence

– Foster cross-fertilization across Nations’ S&T programmes and with NATO’s own activities. Promote interdisciplinary research across the traditional scientific domains to minimize duplication and enhance innovation

NATO S&T Strategy


Reminder

• Current Program of Work is Good

• External Factors Are Forcing Change – Near Peer (Russia and China) Are Fielding Weapons that will Stress the

West: DF-21 / 25; S-400 / 500; Yasin Class Subs; Mr Putin’s Hypersonic Cruise Missile and Long Range UUV, etc.

– The Delivery of Technologically Based Capabilities is More of a Partnership Government and Industry

– Science is at an Inflection Point in New Technical Areas

• These Factors Mean We Must Question All CPoW Activities Starting With:

Clarification of “Improve the Program of Work”


How or Why Does This Proposed Activity Have the Potential to Effect Future Military Capabilities?

NATO UNCLASSIFIED, releasable to AUS, FIN, SWE

STO Technology Trends Report

1. Application of AI

2. Assured Connectivity

3. Autonomous Systems and Countermeasures

4. Computing Superiority

5. Culture

6. Environment

7. Ethics

8. New Weapons

9. Human Capability Enhancement

10. Manufacturing and Materials

11. Sensors

12. Space

13. Energy

Workshop 1, Feb, Paris, 60 scientists

Report Feb

2017

Report Nov 2018

Workshop 2, May, Mons, 20 military/scientists

• 2019 Partnership Opportunities:

– 25-29 Mar: TIDE Sprint, Location TBD

– Spring: Long Term Aspects (LTA) Review

– 14-16 May: ITEC. Stockholm, SWE

– 10-27 Jun: CWIX 2019. Bygoszcz, POL

– Nov: I/ITSEC. Orlando, FL, USA

ACT Structured Partnership


• STO Theme = – military capability that is multi-disciplinary, and hence, cross-

panel + lightly represented in the Collaborative Program of Work (CPoW) in the recent past

• Intent: building a “Community of Interest” in Theme area + gaining CPoW density in Theme area; doing so will increase cross-panel activities, and be in line with direction of science

• 3 Current STO Themes: – “Autonomy”

– “Big Data and AI for Military Decision Making” (BDAI)

– “Operations in a Contested Urban Environment” (OCUE)

STO Themes


Reminder

• Autonomy – 2017: Specialist Meeting and Workshop

– 34 Activities now ongoing

• OCUE – RTC, RTG, RSY in planning

– Need more National Support

• BDAI – STB Mentor: Mr Venema, NLD

– More on next slides

• “Themes” will be updated/evaluated for closure at 2019 PPW

STO Themes

Slide 23 Fall 2018 P/G BMs NATO UNCLASSIFIED Releasable to all Partners


Specialist Meeting on Big Data &

Artificial Intelligence for Military

Decision Making

Bordeaux, France: 30 May – 1 Jun

Keynotes:

- Gen Denis Mercier, NATO SACT

- Lt-Gen (Rtd) Gilles Desclaux,

Raytheon Thales

- Air Vice Marshall Bruce Hedley, Dir

Joint Warfare Center

- Robert Bond, CTO MIT/Lincoln Labs

Parallel Sessions

- Technologies

- Human-Machine Teaming

- Cyber Defence

- Operations & Training

• Common Technical Framework – Reference Architectures, Interoperability standards – Solution building blocks for AI, ML, Gateways etc

• Coordination and Common Services – Processes, legal aspects (e.g. privacy, accountability), governance – Data ontology, Data collection & vetting, Data discovery & distribution

• Develop and demonstrate solutions – Identify Stakeholders COI, Select Use-cases, Prioritize requirements – Develop Use-cases, Assess with Stakeholder COI

• Employ solutions – Integrate solutions in NATO and Nations – Address Technical and CONOPS aspects

• Incorporate Technological Advances – Assess emerging, disruptive solutions, ..

Roadmap Objectives


• Thematic Approach requires a High Involvement Level from NATO:

– BDAI active involvement of ACT, ACO, CMRE, NCIA, NAAG…

– OCUE active involvement of Nations and ACT

• All Panels/Group during Fall PBMs to:

– Discuss BDAI to explore support to Theme

– Explore Support for OCUE activities

L2CC-agreed Recommendations on Themes


• Trial L2CC- recommend approach for “Cross Panel”-named activities: – When TAPs are crafted, potential inputs from other Panels and

the Group should be identified early and discussed amongst the Panel/Group Executives

– The TAPs that have common Panel/Group interest should be sent to the other Panels and the Group to get inputs/experts from the Panel/Group before the TAPs go for approval (as an ET or Activity).

– Final TAPs go forward for approval at each of the Panels/Group concerned

– One Panel/Group (preferably the one from which the proposal originated) will retain administrative control of the activity

Theme Management


ACT - Improving today,

Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

Supreme

Allied

Commander

Transformation

ACT Effort in Emerging and

Disruptive Technologies

Daniel Berry

Future Solutions Branch

[email protected]

12-Oct-18

FUSOL NATO UNCLASSIFIEDNATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the twoNATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN

Strategic Context• Technology essential enabler of military

superiority

• Accelerated pace of technology

development

• Increasing impact of private investments

on our societies, including our defence &

security

• Proliferation of knowledge and technology

• Opportunity

• Threat

• Peer competitors and non-state actors

challenge NATO military superiority (role

of emerging and disruptive technologies in

their modernization)

2

12-

Oct-

18

FUS


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

NATO Landscape

• Warsaw Summit Communiqué mentions emerging technologies

• Emphasis on innovation and exploitation of technologies in NATO nations

• Examples within NATO:

• Dedicated NAC/MC Away day on disruptive technologies (AI as pilot

case)

• 2018 STO Priority Themes:

– Big data and AI for decision making

– Autonomy

– Urban Warfare in a contested environment

• ACT sustained efforts regarding disruptive technologies such as:

– Autonomous ASW, Autonomous MCM and Maritime-ISR

– DT experimentations in exercises

– C-UAxS (2014)

– Autonomy programme (2017)

– EDT Roadmap

– …

312-Oct-18

FUSOLNATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN


Shaping tomorrow,


Emerging and Disruptive

Technologies Roadmap

Aims:

• Coordinate initiatives that will

provide a solid understanding of

the implication of EDT on

NATO’s ability to deter, defend

and project stability

• Inform high-level decisions in

defence planning, capability

development, policy and legal

requirements

• Develop shared understanding

to support interoperability

12-Oct-18

FUSOL 4


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

AIMS

Coordinate initiatives that provide a solid

understanding of the implication of EDT on NATO’s ability to deter,

defend and project stability

Inform high-level decisions in

defenceplanning, capability

development, policy and legal

requirements

Develop shared understanding to

support interoperability

CO

NT

RIB

UT

E

ENDSTATE

NATO maintains and advances the military and

technological advantage vs

its competitors

LOE 3: ENABLING SACEUR’S AOR

ELOE 1: LESSONS LEARNED

DATA

SCIENCE

Em

erg

ing

an

d D

isru

pti

ve T

ech

no

log

ies

EDT Roadmap

12-Oct-18

FUSOL NATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN5

ELOE 2: AUTONOMY

ELOE 3: ETEE

LOE 2: CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT

LOE 1: ENHANCING DECISION MAKING

ARTIFICIAL

INTELLIGENCE

AUTONOMY

IEA FOC

SFA

WARGAME

2022202120202019

DP DEMO

DEMO

DEMO

MCM DEMO

EVENT

TRJE 18


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

LOE 1: Enhancing Decision Making

• Problem: NATO Commands do not leverage the potential of Publicly

Available Information (PAI) to better understand the

information environment.

• Aim: Assess the perception of our populations and potential

adversaries of NATO strategic message and thereby assess

the effectiveness of NATO deterrence in hybrid environments.

This activity was directly influenced by IST-102. The results should

allow us to speed the recognition of, and possibly avoid or de-escalate,

crisis situations.

• Action: ACT (with ASG/PDD, ASG/JIS, ASG/ESC and ACO)

will use Big Data Analytics during TRJE ‘18 to assess the effect

of PAI. ACT will join IST-159 Exploit Cyberspace for Intelligence.

• Output: Information Environment Assessment capability (IOC June

2019 and FOC 2022). Will inform policy changes, doctrine,

planning and training implications for STRATCOM

• FOGO Champion: RADM TAS (ACOS C2DS)

• OPR: COL Blunt (JISR), CDR Atkinson (OPEX)

Information Environment Assessment

12-Oct-18

FUSOLNATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN 6


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

LOE 2: Capability Development

• Problem: Previous SFA and FFAO research phases were

essentially based on the human ability to review a

limited number of documents.

• Aim: Incorporate big data analytics in the SFA/FFAO process

and demonstrate the benefits of Machine Learning (AI)

to support SFA/FFAO development.

• Action: ACT (w/ contractor support) will experiment and demo

the benefits of enhanced analytics and machine learning

using “technology trends” as a test case.

• Output:

– Tech Test Report on how technology trends will influence the SFA

Feb/Mar ‘19)

– Recommended Method Report for the use of computing power in

military implications’ analysis (May ’19 – sub. to contract)

– Short reports on regional perspectives (May-Nov ‘19)

– Execution of the first wargame (Dec ‘19/Jan ‘20)

• FOGO Champion: MG Hickman (DCOS SPP)

• OPR: Mr. Kinaci (Strategic Foresight)

Strategic Foresight Analysis/ Framework for Future

Alliance Operations

12-Oct-18



Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

• Problem: NATO defence planning is built on very complex data sets,

handled by different tools and owned by many actors. The effort

may be enhanced with the application of data science.

• Aim: Results will be used to enhance analysis of information sources and

quality of final products of the defence planning process.

• Action: ACT (in coord. with IS/IMS and ACO) will undertake a study on the

use of Data Science to support defence planning.

• Output:

– Ph. 0 - Orientation-Explore available technologies (until Sep ‘18)

– Ph. 1 - Applicability Report (Dec ‘18)

– Ph. 2 - Selection of candidates for demo (Jan ‘19)

– Ph. 3 - Demonstration (Feb-Jul ‘19)

• FOGO Champion: Air Commodore Reefman (ACOS Defence Planning)

• OPR: COL Riis-Vestergaard (Defence Planning Integration)

Actionable Data for Defence Planning


12-Oct-18

FUSOL

NATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN 8


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

LOE 3: Enabling SACEUR’s AOR

• Problem: NATO requires a comprehensive understanding of preparation,

projection and sustainment risks, capabilities and available

resources to support timely and effective decision making when

projecting and sustaining forces.

• Action: ACT (in coord. with IS/DPP, ACO and support from academia and

civilian experts) will determine the best potential application to build

“blue force situational awareness” for readiness (30/30/30) in a

network of networks.

• Output

– Report on required shared information (Oct ‘18)

– Demonstration of Project “ORION” (Dec ‘18)

– Report on evaluation of disruptive technologies (Jan ‘19)

– Prototype demonstration to support blue force awareness and readiness

during TIDE Sprint (Apr ‘19)

• FOGO Champion: BG Aamoth (DACOS C2DS)

• OPR: COL Cain (Logistics, Deployment & Sustainment)

NATO Shared Situational Awareness

12-Oct-18



Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

Lessons Learned

• Problem: NATO Lessons Learned process has been challenged by

difficulties in data collection, information management,

information tracking and sharing, and speed of relevance

of analysis provided.

• Action: Industry and Academia will present and demonstrate new

technology-based solutions that may address the current and

foreseen challenges to the LL capability at a New Technology

Event in Lisbon (Oct ‘18)

• Output: Report assessing various solutions to be used to determine

future COA for the tool (procurement or development). Impact

on policy, planning and decision making.

• FOGO Champion: BGEN Antonio Nascimento (COM JALLC)

• OPR: Mr Olaru (JALLC Lessons Learned Research Division)

Enabling LOEs

12-Oct-18

FUSOL

NATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN

ED10


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

Enabling LOEs

• Problem: NATO needs to create a common understanding and set the

conditions for the integration of autonomous functions and

capabilities in a coherent, standardised and interoperable

manner.

• Action: ACT Autonomy Programme at the moment dealing with 6 Capability

Building Blocks (Terminology & Standardisation; C2 & ISR; Counter

and Protect; Access & Operate; Artificial Intelligence & Education,

Training, Exercise and Evaluation; and Human Aspects)

• Output:

– Demonstrate autonomous logistic and FP systems during TRJE ’18

– Demonstrate autonomous underwater vehicles for MCM (Oct ‘19)

– Facilitate common understanding of effects of Autonomy in NATO (2020)

– Drive tangible actions to begin filling NATO capability gaps (2022)

• FOGO Champion: MGEN Hickman (DCOS SPP)

• OPR: COL Marstaller (Concept Development)

Autonomy

12-Oct-18



Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

• Problem: NATO Air C2 training is challenged by an intense learning

environment, high student-instructor ratios and high

cost.

• Action: ACT supporting a DEU-funded study to explore use of AI in

AIR C2 training

• Output:

– Study report - Incorporating AI in AIR C2 Training (Oct ‘19)

– Use cases and study findings will inform development of a

demonstrator (Mar ‘21)

– Results will be used to formulate a NATO approach to the

incorporation of AI in NATO ETEE

• FOGO Champion: BGEN Tsouganatos (ACOS JETE)

• OPR: LCol Harlow (ETEE Plans and Policy)

Education, Training, Exercises and Evaluation (ETEE)

Enabling LOEs

Using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Air C2 Training

12-Oct-18



Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

12-Oct-18


2019 Autonomy POW

(Tentative)

Project / Activity Deliverables ACT Lead

AI at the Effector Edge

(C2 functional concept)

Exploratory study and concept C2DS

AI at the Sensor Edge


Study on AI and C2, (irw sensors) C2DS, STO

Cyber Security (based on Gap analysis results 2018) Exploratory study and concept CYBER

Enhanced Events Analysis Analysis CYBER

Autonomy for Force Protection Exploratory study and concept TBD

Autonomy for Operations in an Urban Environment Concept development CNDV, OPEX

Cognitive Computing & Advanced Analytics


Pre-concept phase, analysis of concept

relevance on the use of cognitive

computing for C2

OA


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

CA

Ps

EN

HA

NC

ING

DE

C.

MA

KIN

G

Information Environment Assessment

Autonomy - AI

Awareness &

UnderstandingE

NA

BL

ING

SA

CE

UR

’s

AO

R

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

Events

Policy dev.

Concepts

Experimentation/

Demonstration

Standard/Doctrine

Training

Capability (IOC, FOC)

Report

Recommendations

Ach

iev

ing

Tim

ely

an

d I

nfo

rmed

Dec

isio

n M

ak

ing

IST-157

Autonomy, C2

decision making –

First draft proposal

Autonomy Policy

1st Draft-

Proposal

Autonomy Policy Draft-

Workshop 3 AI in ETEE

First Study Report

Terminology 1st

Proposals

agreed

C-UAxS concept

1st Draft

proposal

C-UAxS

1st Workshop

C-UAxS

2nd Workshop

CWIXTIDE Sprint

TIDE Sprint

CD&E Conf

RCC

COTC

‘19 ‘20

Innovation

Challenge

Innovation

Challenge

IEA- IOC Declared

Emerging & Disruptive Technologies Roadmap 2019

Roadmap towards FOC

IST-157

Prototype

Proof of Concept Report

Multi-Faceted

Autonomy Event

CoRe Final ConceptCoRe Model 2.0

Autonomous

Logistics CWIX

SACT Annual Update

to NACSTO Annual

Update to NAC

NATO Revised/Updated policies

NATO Policy on Big

Data

NATO Strategy on

Disruptive

Technology

ASW – MCM

Maritime-ISR

Future & NDPPLessons Learned

Logistics & Sustainability

Q2, Q3, Q4 - Explore use of data science to support NDPPSFA-Big Data Test

Reports

SFA Regional

Reports using AIUse of big data

analytics for FFAO

Main

tain

ing

NA

TO

Warf

igh

tin

g E

dg

eP

ers

iste

nt,

Res

ilie

nt,

Su

sta

ined

Jo

int

Fo

rce

s

CoRe Concept Freeze and

Validation Experiment

AM/3D Concept

Experiment

CoRe Draft

NDPP/MVI

Priorities

AM/3D Draft

Concept

Intelligent Crowdsourcing Data

Support System, to enable

situation-aware decision making

for disaster response and

Logistics

Study report on use of big

data analytics for M-ISR

RDIM-E

Acquire Deployment

Simulation Tool

Data ScienceTeam Development

Experiment Plan

(Oct ‘18) Application to

Use CasesHackathon (Feb)

TIDE Sprint (Apr)

Demo & Engagement

(Apr-Jun)

Collaborative

Autonomous MCM

Demonstration

Underwater Comms

FOC Janus


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 +

15

Terminology

Counter

Autonomy

NIAG Study

Terminology

Legal & Ethical

AI in ETEE

Cognitive computing and

analytics

NDC Strat

Study

Initiated Autonomy Projects Summary

Human on the Loop

Autonomy in Logistics

Legend Deliverable

Milestone

Trends implications

Prog sheet

C

o

r

e

E

n

a

b

l

i

n

g

1st proposals Agreed baseline

Threat

s

Project Report

Initial analysis

Concept

Interim report

Log base demo

Use – case Study

Concept

Concept

Final report

Threat trend

Agreed set of terminology

Interim report

Draft Concept

NATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN12-Oct-18

FUSOL


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

• TIDE Sprint is occurring this week, Spring 25-29 Mar Split, HRV

• ORA Conference, 15-16 Oct, Zagreb, CRO

• ICD&E Conference, 30 Oct – 1 Nov, Washington D.C

• Exercises, 25 Oct-7 Nov, Livex TRJE ‘18 – CPX 14-23 Nov

• NATO-Industry Forum, 12-13 Nov, Berlin DEU

• I/ITSEC (Largest M&S convention), 26-30 Nov, Orlando, FL, USA

• Chiefs of Transformation Conference, 12-13 Dec, Norfolk, VA, USA

• Innovation Challenge (on Logistics), 25 Apr ‘19, NLD

• CWIX, 12-14 Jun ‘19, Bydgoszcz, Poland

• https://www.act.nato.int/

• https://innovationhub-act.org/

• https://emtep.exonaut.com/ExonautWeb/cal/#/rmp/start

• https://tide.act.nato.int/ (Send email to [email protected] to get an

account)

Upcoming Events

12-Oct-18


https://innovationhub-act.org/

https://emtep.exonaut.com/ExonautWeb/cal/#/rmp/start

mailto:[email protected]


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

Questions and Answers

NATO UNCLASSIFIED REL AUSTRALIA FINLAND and SWEDEN 1712-Oct-18

FUSOL


Shaping tomorrow,


Disruptive Technologies

• Rapid development and use of emerging and disruptive technologies.

Inter alia:

– Quantum computing

– Big Data analytics

– Artificial Intelligence

– Autonomy

– “Swarming”

– Hypersonic weapons

– Human Machine Teaming

– Advanced Manufacturing

– and much more….

“Dawn of a New Revolutionary Era”

12-Oct-18

FUSOL 18


Shaping tomorrow,

Bridging the two

Mar-Apr 19 Regional

Perspectives WS

10 May 18 – SACT IPR

Apr 18 - WS #1

Methodology, Tech.

Trends,

Regional Perspectives

Feb/Mar 19 - Technology Test Report

SFA/FFAO

Timeline

May 19 – Recommended Method Report

May – Nov 19 – Regional Perspectives Report

(Middle East and North Africa and Sahel,

Artic, Russia-Eastern Europe and Arctic)

Sep 19 Regional

Perspectives WS

Nov WS #2

– Initial Findings,

Tech. Trends,

Regional Perspectives

Contractual Process

Jul-Sep 18

Jul 18 – Statement of Work

Sep/Oct 18 –

Initial Work

Dec 19/Jan 20 – Regional Scenario Wargame


12-Oct-18


V.1.0

IST Panel Business Meeting 15 October 2018

NCI Agency IST Science and Technology Highlights

1

Dr Peter Lenk

Service Strategy and Innovation

V.1.0

What does the Agency do?

NATO UNCLASSIFIED 2

Life-Cycle Mandate

S&T / Requirements Phase Acquisition Phase In-Service Phase Disposal Phase

V.1.0

NATO UNCLASSIFIED 3

On duty 24/7

Baltic Air Policing

Support to Turkey

NATO UNCLASSIFIED 7

Resolute Support

NATO Computer Incident Response Capability

200 targeted cyber

attacks a month

V.1.0

• Of the 6% Subject Matter Expertise, about €20M is S&T funding

• €14M from ACT

• €4M from the C3S

• €2M other

• Participation in STO efforts is at the whim of the various individual sponsors

2018 Total Business Volume (Plan) (887.2 M€)

NATO UNCLASSIFIED 4

V.1.0

NATO UNCLASSIFIED 5

Governance

1. Organizational Governance 2. Policy Governance 3. Programme Governance 4. Customer Governance of Programmes

• ACO • ACT • NATO HQ & NATO Organizations • Nations

NCI Organisation

NCI Agency

Agency Supervisory Board (ASB)

Steering Committees

C3B C3B

Senior Policy Committees

C3B

1

3

2

North Atlantic Council

4

• Investment Committee (IC)

• Budget Committee (BC)

• Resources Policy and Planning Board (RPPB)

C3B C3B C3B

V.1.0

• Work is centred around: information analysis & decision support (42%); communications and cyber (30%); and Joint Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (15%).

• Significant work in Operational Analysis supporting NATO defence planning and direct support to theatre commanders’ operational assessments

• Growing work in Data Science, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and [Big] Data Analytics

Recent NCI Agency S&T Topical Coverage (2017)

Data presented as percentage of overall S&T funding

V.1.0

Current Data Science Projects

| 7

• Text analysis

• Strategy and policies

• Architecture and Capability visualization & dependencies

• Intel product analysis

• ISAF archive analysis

• Propaganda detection

• Data Science and DOTMPLFI

• Test case with IBM Watson

• Big data capture

• Trident Juncture

• Varying levels of correlation between C3 Strategy and Policies

• Analyse documents from different perspectives

V.1.0

• Afghan Public Opinion Analysis: • Data collected quarterly since 2008 • Extract hidden structure using Big Data / Data Mining

techniques • Use model-based clustering to classify Afghan population

rather than rely on ethnic or other ‘standard’ categorisations

• Results bring new insights and allow tailoring of messaging to Afghan populations of interest

NCI Agency S&T Highlights

• Trident Juncture 18 Data Capture

• Five major NATO sites

• Capturing additional data traffic to and from other sites

• To be used for big data / data science studies

V.1.0


• AI & big data analytics: • Meta-data tagging

• 13 years of Intelligence data from Kosovo – only 10% analysed

• Automated creation / update of Battle Space Objects

• Afghanistan data archive • Volume and variety: +/- 200TB of binary, imagery, text, portals, emails, etc.

• Analysis to understand how AI / big data techniques can add structure, add meta data to allow indexing, search and retrieval

• Adding Analytics to Open Source Intelligence

• Automatic • Machine learning for adding metadata

• Analytics for preparing Daily Intel Reports

• User requested • On-topic analytics preparing one or more specific reports

• Prepared Analytics Modules with corresponding Dynamic Dashboards

V.1.0

• Joint Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (JISR) • Architecture Study: Support to the Alliance Future

Surveillance & Control (AFSC) Concept Stage

• Friendly Force Tracking (FFT) testing and Architecture work

• Effects of Offensive Navigation Warfare (NAVWAR)

• Architecture for Electronic Warfare Functional Service

• Support to NAEW

• Geo support to Operations and Training


10

• Other • FMN • Command and Control

• Air, Land and Maritime

• Core Services • Communications Systems

• Wireless, SATCOM, IP over Radio, Spectrum Management

• Logistics • Medical • Service Management and Control • Ballistic missile Defence (BMD) Support • Exercise Support

V.1.0

• NCIA has a full life cycle responsibility

• We support Operations and Exercises

• This gives us unique perspectives and opportunities

• We have access to unique data

Summary and Conclusions

V.1.0

Questions?

12 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

V.1.0

KNIME Analytics Server

Workflow: Sentiment Analytics

Workflow: Intel Pentagon

Workflow: Fake News Indication

Other Workflows…

RE

ST A

PI (

Syn

c &

A-S

ync)

AOSS Advanced AnalyticsAOSS

ETL Server

Text Translations Document Labeling Browser

anonymization

AOSSDatabase/Indexes

Metadata standardization

PowerBI Report Server

Dashboard results(e.g. network graph)

Dataset results(e.g. Analyst Notebook import)

Text Translations Image Tagging (subtitling) Named Entity Recognition

Source A

Source B

Source C

Query AOSS Index

On NewContent

HortonWorks Hadoop

NodeI

NodeIV

NodeV

NodeII

NodeVI

NodeIII

Hiv

e S

erv

ice

AOSS Server

User Web Portal Menu: Advanced Analytics Multilingual support

On UserRequest

Publish DataSet

UseDistributed Compute

AOSS AnalyticsDataMart

Publish Dashboard

Advanced AnalyticsRequest Form

Menu

I

II

Adding Analytics to Open Source Intelligence

I. Automatic

Machine learning for adding metadata

Analytics for preparing Daily Intel Reports

II. User requested

On-topic analytics preparing one or more

specific reports

Prepared Analytics Modules with

corresponding Dynamic Dashboards

KNIME Analytics Server

• Provides wizard user-interface

• Executes prepared Analytics Modules

• Refers the user to Analytics Results when available

Power BI Report Server

• Hosts Dynamic Dashboards on Analytics Results

HortonWorks Hadoop

• Speeds-up the processing by parallelization

Architecture of propaganda detection and OSInt Analysis

V.1.0

User experience – Dashbords in Power BI

How are entities linked together

V.1.0

User experience – Dashbords in Power BI

Hot topics (left) and sentiment around them (right)

V.1.0

NCI Agency S&T Highlights (2)

• FMN • Finalisation of Spiral 2 & development of Spirals 3 & 4 • Standard test cases developed and available • For NATO Reaction Force 2018 – Spiral 1, v1.1, Compliant

network for interconnection of NATO and NRF nations • Support development FMN Governance Directive • NATO Deployable CIS ‘Dragon Flies’ Spiral 1 compliant

• AI & big data analytics: • Meta-data tagging

• 13 years of Intelligence data from Kosovo – only 10% analysed

• Automated creation / update of Battle Space Objects

• Afghanistan data archive • Volume and variety: +/- 200TB of binary, imagery, text, portals, emails, etc.

• Analysis to understand how AI / big data techniques can add structure, add meta data to allow indexing, search and retrieval

TECHNICAL ACTIVITY PROPOSAL (TAP)

ACTIVITY REFERENCE

NUMBER IST

ACTIVITY TITLE

Full Duplex Radio Technology

for Military Applications

APPROVAL

TBA

TYPE AND SERIAL

NUMBER RTG

START

TBD

LOCATION(S) AND DATES TBD END

TBD

COORDINATION WITH OTHER BODIES N/A

NATO CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIVITY NATO UNCLASSIFIED Non-NATO Invited

TBD

PUBLICATION DATA TR NU

KEYWORDS Full Duplex Radio, Self-Interference Cancellation, Spectral Efficiency,

Mobile Tactical Communications, Electronic Warfare, Cognitive Radio

I. BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION (Relevance to NATO):

The IST-ET-101 has analysed the relevance of the emerging in-band full duplex transceiver technology for future military

applications. In-band full duplex transceiver technology here means that a device can simultaneously transmit and receive

radio signals on the same frequency. The primary focus was on applications in mobile tactical communications, but the

consideration were not limited to this domain. For instance, also combinations of communications and electronic warfare

have been discussed.

Historically in-band full duplex transceivers have been considered to be technically impossible due to the strong self-

interference from the transmit path to the reception path of the transceiver. To avoid this self-interference problem, in the

past quasi full duplex approaches have been proposed which, e.g., either use the same frequency at different times for

transmit and receive operations (time division multiplex operation) or use different frequencies at the same time (frequency

division multiplex operation). Obviously, these quasi full duplex approaches reduce the spectral efficiency if compared to a

true in-band full duplex transceiver which offers both types of operations at the same time on the same frequency.

The IST-ET-101’s analysis of the relevance of the emerging in-band full duplex transceiver technology for future military

applications started with a discussion of two conflicting trends with respect to frequency spectrum. On the one hand, the

present and future tactical communication services in NATO-led operations like NATO Response Forces (NRF), Very

High Readiness Joint task Force (VJTF), Enhanced Forward Presence (EFP), and also in NATO initiatives like Federated

Mission Networking (FMN) are raising more and more attention. Consequently, more military frequency spectrum is

required to satisfy the information exchange needs in the wireless tactical communications domain. In addition, the

information exchange needs to be protected against electronic warfare threats (e.g. intentional jamming, interception,

reconnaissance). On the other hand, frequency spectrum is a scarce and limited resource which cannot be augmented. This

leads to the challenge of using the frequency spectrum as efficiently as possible. Several solutions to cope with the

spectrum challenge have been briefly discussed by the IST-ET-101. One of them is the emerging in-band full duplex radio

technology.

When designing a full-duplex systems, the intrusion of a self-interference signal in the reception path causes the key

challenge. This self-interference signal needs at first to be modelled properly and secondly, be eliminated from the

reception path. Several state-of-the-art approaches which have been proposed from researchers at different universities have

been reviewed by the IST-ET-101. One conclusion of the group was that all the proposals have in common that they use a

two-staged approach, one stage in the analog domain and another stage in the digital domain.

The assessment of a relevant subset of state-of-the-art prototypes lead to two general observations:

Firstly, the feasibility of full-duplex operation has been convincingly proven for lower-power commercial mobile

communication systems in a laboratory environment. The independent state-of-the-art prototypes around the world

achieve beyond 100 dB of total self-interference cancellation (SIC), even with rather large operation bandwidth

(up to 80 MHz).

Secondly, almost without exceptions, the existing experimental research is limited to the 2.4 GHz industrial,

scientific, and medical (ISM) band.

From these two observations it follows immediately that

the results need to be confirmed under realistic conditions in field environments for a selection of relevant

operational scenarios.

further research is still needed to confirm the prospects of full duplex radios

o at lower military frequencies, e.g., at HF, VHF and UHF. Although modulation bandwidth is typically

much smaller in military systems at lower carrier frequencies, frequency hopping still requires wideband

self-interference cancellation.

o at higher transmit powers, e.g. 20 or even 50 Watts, to ensure higher communication ranges.

Some potential operational scenarios are also discussed in the IST-ET-101’s report. In particular, the report gives examples

where the new full-duplex technology can beneficially be used in both military domains, tactical communications and

electronic warfare. These examples are categorized in three groups: 1.) spectrally efficient two-way tactical

communications; 2.) tactical communications with electronic warfare; 3.) signal intelligence with simultaneous electronic

attack.

The IST-ET-101’s analysis of the relevance of the emerging in-band full duplex transceiver technology for future military

applications has shown that it is in principle possible to build such transceivers. However, most findings published so far,

are not specific for military use cases and side constraints such as typical military frequency bands and transmit powers.

Further research is needed to evaluate and demonstrate the benefits of the in-band full duplex transceiver technology in

both military domains, tactical communications and electronic warfare. In addition, field tests have to be performed to

increase the technology readiness level.

The results of the IST-ET-101’s analysis pave the way for such an in-depth follow-on study. Thus, the results motivate the

establishment of a Research Task Group on Full Duplex Technology. Such a follow-on RTG should work on a

demonstrator to show the benefits which are achievable in each of the above mentioned groups. For instance, in the

spectrally efficient two-way tactical communications group the gain of the “true” full-duplex approach over a classic

approach to “quasi” full-duplex operation can be determined.

II. OBJECTIVE(S):

The objectives for RTG on Full Duplex Technology are to:

• further identify candidate areas of military application for the emerging full duplex technology

• further assess state of the art solutions for tackling the self-interference cancellation problem

(both, in the analog and digital domain)

• identify and describe concepts for transferring the findings from the civil/commercial domain

to the military domain, e.g.,

o from the civil/commercial ISM-band to military relevant frequency spectrum (e.g. NATO V/UHF bands)

o from rather restricted transmit powers (typically less than 0,1 Watt) to military relevant transmit powers

(e.g. 20 or 50 Watts)

• identify and describe concepts for making the results (to the largest possible extent) frequency agnostic

• pave the way for a common multinational demonstrator

o identify and describe internal and external interfaces of a full duplex system

o outline a implementation from commercial off-the-shelf SDR technology

The RTG will also pay attention to the results from IST-080 (RTG) Software Defined Radio, IST-077 (RTG) Cognitive

Radio in NATO, IST-104 (RTG) Cognitive Radio in NATO II, and IST-140 Cognitive Radio Networks.

III. TOPICS TO BE COVERED:

The following topics will be addressed:

• Which tactical communication applications can benefit from using full duplex technology?

• Which efforts are needed for the integration of full duplex principles in existing communication systems?

• Which primarily non-communication systems can also benefit from this technology (e.g. Jamming Detection)?

• How to transfer the findings from the civil/commercial domain (e.g. ISM-band, 0,1 Watt) to military domain

(e.g. NATO V/UHF bands, 20 or 50 Watts)?

• How to set up a common multinational demonstrator based on commercial off-the-shelf SDR components?

• What are the short, middle, and long term challenges and opportunities of the emerging full duplex technology?

IV. DELIVERABLE (e.g. S/W Engage Model, Database,…) AND/OR END PRODUCT (e.g. Final Report):

The RTG will deliver a Technical Report describing possible applications, resulting challenges and opportunities to

implement full duplex principles.

In addition, the RTG might work on a multinational demonstrator for showing the benefits of full duplex principles in

various application domains.

V. TECHNICAL TEAM LEADER AND LEAD NATION:

DEU, TBC

VI. NATIONS WILLING/INVITED TO PARTICIPATE:

NATO nations and PfP like SWE und FIN are invited to participate.

VII. NATIONAL AND/OR NATO RESOURCES NEEDED (Physical and non-physical Assets):

Experts in areas mentioned above funded for at least x.xx man years for work on the topics and participation in meetings.

VIII. CSO RESOURCES NEEDED (e.g. Consultant Funding):

Standard publishing support


ACTIVITY REFERENCE NUMBER

Federated Interoperability of Military C2 and IoT Systems

APPROVAL TBA

TYPE AND SERIAL NUMBER

START

01 May 2019

LOCATION(S) AND DATES Locations in participating nations END

30 Apr 2022

COORDINATION WITH OTHER BODIES NCIA

NATO CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIVITY U Non-NATO Invited

YES

PUBLICATION DATA TR U

KEYWORDS IoT, Interoperability, Security, Federation, C2, HADR, Smart City


The IST-147 Research Task Group (RTG) on Military Applications of the Internet of Things (IoT) explored the applicability and utility of IoT to the military domain. During the course of the last two and a half years, the activities of this group, which included experiments, demonstrations, and workshops, have demonstrated that IoT has a significant role to play in future Military Operations and Collaborative Resilience, including Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR), counterterrorism, smart physiological monitoring of soldiers, and logistics and supply chain management.

Exploiting IoT capabilities and technologies has the potential to significantly increase the speed and breadth of obtaining Situation Awareness (SA) for military operations. For example, in the event of a natural disaster in a future smart city environment, being able to tap into the plethora of sensors and intelligent services within the city could enable the Military to gather SA much faster than relying solely on custom deployed sensing and information gathering. IoT is being deployed to monitor everything from weather to power grids, traffic flow, public transportation, water quality, air quality, noise pollution, medical services, and many other aspects. Being able to tap into and leverage such an information rich environment could be invaluable for future military operations.

The next challenge that naturally arises is to investigate different approaches to integrate these vast and disparate IoT systems and capabilities into existing Military Command and Control (C2) systems. Without systematic approaches to integrate these capabilities, it would be very difficult to leverage IoT capabilities in support of military operations.

Two popular approaches to enabling IoT exploitation within Military C2 systems are to either define new standards for Military IoT or to leverage the multitude of existing standards and enable federation and interoperability between these different systems. The former approach is challenging given the proliferation of existing standards and systems that are already in vogue. Defining new standards may make it more challenging to leverage existing capabilities. However, some common interfaces and data models may be necessary to enable interoperability with existing NATO and member nation C2 systems. In particular, this activity will examine Federated Mission Networking (FMN) and attempt to adopt mechanisms to allow interoperability between commercial and civilian IoT systems and FMN.

One of the results of the IST-147 activities has been to demonstrate the utility of exploiting IoT services and capabilities offered by Smart City environments, particularly for urban operations and Operations Other Than War such as HADR. However, an identified shortcoming has been the lack of standards and the challenges of discovery – to identify, connect, and leverage these Smart City IoT capabilities. Many cities and municipalities define their own standards for how this information is made available to their residents, and one off integration with each of these standards is not tractable. Hence decentralized and federated discovery capabilities need to be explored to alleviate these challenges.

Another identified challenge is security – leveraging these existing IoT capabilities implies that the military will be relying on IoT sensors, effectors, and services that owned by third parties, such as municipal governments, utility companies, or other commercial enterprises, and utilizing communications links that are similarly not secured by the military. At the very least, any military C2 system that interfaces with these types of civilian IoT capabilities must track the pedigree of any data originating or traversing these systems all the way to the military commander who might be basing his or her decisions on such data. The underlying threats of an adversary influencing or affecting this information need to be understood and mechanisms need to be developed to counter such threats. Resilient data analytics and adversary-resistant artificial intelligence methods need to be investigated in order to make sure that malicious data sources cannot unduly affect or influence decision making.

A related security challenge is that of information leakage, caused by the pervasive deployment of IoT devices within the operating environment. Leakage could occur at the RF level or at higher levels (e.g., facility level, activity level, and information level). Other risks include new attack vectors, via IoT devices, that might enable the compromise of C2 systems.

Other topics to be explored include examining existing IoT standards, as well as STANAGs, identifying those that would be worthy of either leveraging or interfacing with, developing reference architectures to enable interoperability with both military and civilian IoT, and exploring the range of possibilities of how to exercise C2 over IoT assets in a federated environment (including articulation / tasking). In the context of security, an example of such an approach could be combining civilian blockchain technologies, such as Hyperledger or Ethereum, with STANAGs 4774 and 4478 in order to provide a trusted information management approach for IoT systems used in civil-military cooperation (CIMIC) applications. A related challenge is performing collaborative data analytics in federated environments, where the individual partners might not be willing to disclose their private input data, but are interested in obtaining relevant insights from the combined data using data fusion and data analytics. An innovative technology that may enable such privacy-preserving collaborative data analytics is called Secure Multi-Party Computation, consisting of advanced (homomorphic) cryptographic techniques.

This work will build on the previous work of the IST-147 Research Task Group on Military Applications of Internet of Things.

II. OBJECTIVE(S):

1. To examine existing IoT standards, as well as existing STANAGs, architectures, and best practices to better understand how to integrate commercial and civilian IoT technologies and capabilities into Military C2 and Logistics systems, and in particular NATO’s Federated Mission Networking (FMN) architecture.

2. To further define the use-cases/scenarios, interfaces, and practical usability of IoT based solutions for HADR operations in future Smart City environments and to assist in realizing Collaborative Resilience.

3. To explore the challenges of discovery of commercial IoT capabilities and services, given the relative lack of standardization.

4. To identify security challenges and develop mitigation strategies for those challenges when interfacing military C2 and civilian IoT infrastructures and when performing fusion with or otherwise relying on data coming from various sources of information.

5. To experiment and demonstrate, through proof-of-concept trials, the benefits and ability to integrate civilian IoT and military C2 systems, especially in the context of providing Collaborative Resilience.

6. To potentially engage in standardization activities in the civilian space, for example the IEEE Smart Cities initiatives.

7. To organize workshops at conferences to engage with commercial IoT activities.


1. Scenarios that will serve as the basis for exploration and experimentation.

2. Existing standardization efforts and participation in future standardization efforts within the commercial and civilian IoT domain.

3. Examination of low-cost and COTS IoT devices for both civilian as well as military use.

4. Mechanisms necessary to interface commercial and civilian IoT with military C2 and logistics systems.

5. Federated discovery mechanisms.

6. Federated Mission Networks (FMN) and necessary interfaces / extensions to support integration of IoT with FMN.

7. Security challenges including potential threats and vulnerabilities that could be exploited by adversaries.

8. Communications challenges – both in terms of connectivity (e.g., interfacing military networks with commercial networks via gateways) and resource constraints (e.g., with tactical edge networks).

IV. DELIVERABLES:

The deliverables of the task group will be: 1. Annual demonstrations of the concepts studied and key solutions identified in a realistic military

scenario. Potential venues for the demonstrations include ICMCIS and CWIX.

2. Special sessions at suitable conferences, such as the IEEE World Forum on IoT.

3. Publications of the results of the activity in journals, scientific magazines, and conferences.

4. A final report which may take the form of a book on military aspects of IoT.


Technical Team Leaders: Niranjan Suri, USA, Zbigniew Zielinski, POL Lead nation: USA


NATO nations: DEU, ESP, ITA, POL, NLD, NOR, USA, (awaiting confirmation from other nations) NATO bodies: NCIA, NIAG PfP nations: FIN, SUI


Host nations to provide local arrangements for meetings and workshops


Standard CSO support including ScienceConnect and WebEx or other teleconference system. Support for open access publication of results in leading international journals or as a book


TBD ACTIVITY TITLE

Mission-Oriented Research

For AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making

APPROVAL October 2018

TYPE ST START

October 2018

FOCUS GROUP END

October 2019

LOCATION(S) AND DATES 4

th QTR, FY 2018, Location TBD

2nd

QTR, FY 2019, Location TBD

COORDINATION WITH OTHER BODIES

STB, OCS, All STO Panels/Group

NATO CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIVITY

NATO Unclassified Non-NATO Invited

Yes

KEYWORDS Innovation Approach, Mission-Oriented Research, Artificial Intelligence, Big-Data,

Decision Making, Augmented Decision Making

I. BACKGROUND:

The NATO IST160 AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making (MDM) specialist meeting in Bordeaux was a testimony to the enormous interest we, researchers and innovators, currently have to make Artificial Intelligence work for the military. And the mere fact that this meeting was organized, as issued by STB, underpins the urgency felt at higher political levels of NATO that this is something we (panels, in close collaboration with CSO) want to do. At the same time this is thus an opportunity to establish novel ways of organizing NATO Research and Innovation activities.

II. MILITARY RELEVANCE:

During the meeting several findings were established: First, realizing practical solutions that improve MDM using Artificial Intelligence technologies requires collaboration between military, industry, and academia. Otherwise NATO nations will have great difficulty utilizing the same brainpower and tools that industry and academia have access to. Second, to improve the practical impact and commander thrust in and acceptance of AI technologies, we need to begin demystifying what AI can mean for them. It only becomes a tangible concept once it is applied into a specific domain and given purpose. Third, real solutions (for problems or opportunities) require multiple disciplines, not only machine learning skills. They require cross-panel input from, e.g., modelling & simulation, human factors, information technology, operational research and analysis.

Now, one of the issues that lies on the table is that of an innovation-challenge (rather than an AI-challenge): how to shape and retain an effective cross-panel R&D effort on this subject?

III. SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVE(S) AND EXPECTED ACHIEVEMENTS:

The goal of the activity proposed here is to provide (part of) a way forward with respect to this innovation-challenge, by organizing Mission-Oriented Research

1. Mission-Oriented Research, as being

adopted by the EU and already well-known from DARPA, focusses research around several bold, clear, ambitious and cross-disciplinary missions that contribute to a Grand Challenge (e.g., Clean Oceans, see example) while allowing multiple, bottom-up solutions (thereby capitalizing on the unique fragmented nature of e.g. NATO). Another more quotes from Mazzucato [1]: “The [EU] Social Development Goals […] are useful to ensure focus, but for the most part remain too broad to be actionable. On the other end of the spectrum, research and innovation projects have clear objectives and are actionable, but will remain isolated in their impacts if not clearly linked to their ability to address global challenges and to achieve societal impact.”

In terms of NATO a Grand Challenge could be ‘AI Supremacy’2, indeed lacking direct actionability. The

research activities in different panels are the other end of the spectrum Mazzucato describes: achieving great local results, but they often do not explore the full potential for NATO. That’s where missions come in, to set the direction for a solution without specifying how to achieve them (in that sense, a mission is also a form of roadmapping). Mazzucato: “This will require dedicated framing. For example, a mission on quantum computing could have strong societal impact if it is framed in terms of the potential to enhance cyber-security, improve industrial processes, or support the development of new types of health care services”.

1 M. Mazzucato, Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union, February 2018,

https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/mazzucato_report_2018.pdf 2 We have to think careful about our wording, not punching above our weight unintentionally. E.g., AI Supremacy also

includes autonomy, which is out of scope with respect to IST160 (although NATO surely also wants ‘Autonomy

Supremacy’). Another choice of words would be ‘Decision Making Supremacy’, but this scope is also larger than AI,

including e.g. human-cognitive-enhancement-pills…

Açıklama [KP(1]: I think there are two options,

1. Start a specialist team (ST), lasting appr 1 year, to establish a number of

missions and organize (cross panel)

teams around those. Then for each of those mission construct a dedicated (e.g.)

RTG.

2. Start with an ET to finalize this TAP, then start 1 RTG to establish missions

and organize teams for each mission.

I prefer the first, faster, option.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/mazzucato_report_2018.pdf

Figure 1: Both images from Mazzucato [1].

The activity proposed here, to organize Mission-Oriented Research to advance AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making, consists of the following steps:

Formulation of a Grand Challenge that captures the collective importance and urgency of what we (different nations in NATO) feel with respect to AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making (or AI Supremacy, or Decision Making Supremacy, or …). The result of this work will also contribute to a vision of NATO on this subject of AI in general.

Generation of a number of missions that are bold, clear, ambitious, et cetera. These missions can bring together, explicitly, a number of existing (and new) non-cross-panel activities into a cross-panel endeavor, and/or be the starting point of new panel activities.

o A possible route is to identify a number of ‘archetypes of decision making’ relevant for (near) future operations and for each archetype organize a mission-formulation workshop with an audience from across NATO panels, operational military, and relevant industries/other possible contributors.

Establishment of one (or multiple) Collaboration Network(s, linked to each mission) on AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making (or AI Supremacy, or Decision Making Supremacy, or …), with participants from NATO nations (cross-panel), military, industry, et cetera. These network(s) are facilitated, in terms of their capacity to collaborate, to proactively manage their portfolio of projects/activities.

IV. SCIENTIFIC TOPICS TO BE COVERED:

Making ‘AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making’ work for NATO and national members, requires involvement of many fields of scientific expertise. For instance from a technical OODA-loop perspective expertise is required that covers sensing, understanding, and plan generation and selection. All these things together ought to be integrated in an operational system with human decision makers that need to trust and accept such a system. Panels that can contribute are therefore:

Sensors and Electronics Technology (SET), e.g., … (sensing technologies, …), Applied Vehicle Technology (AVT), e.g., … (ai in autonomous systems, …), Information Systems Technology (IST), e.g., … (communications frameworks, …), Human Factors and Medicine Panel (HFM), e.g., … (human-system interfaces, … ), Systems Concepts and Integration (SCI), e.g., … (system integration, …), NATO Modelling and Simulation Group (NMSG), e.g., … (environment modelling, …), System Analysis & Studies (SAS), e.g., … (operational concepts, …)

V. SYNERGIES AND COMPLEMENTARITIES:

A STO activity to establish cross-panel Mission-Oriented Research on a strategically relevant topic as AI for MDM will benefit from support and close collaboration with CSO. Also, it will undoubtedly focus on operational aspects. It is therefore imperative that the activity have military involvement to support the development of the missions and participation in the Collaboration Networks. The activity will also leverage work from National Organizations.

VI. EXPLOITATION AND IMPACT:

This activity, by means of formulation of a Grand Challenge, will contribute to NATO’s vision on AI and Big Data for Military Decision Making. The missions that result from this activity, effectively a form of a roadmap, make that same vision actionable. A means of monitoring and coordinating progress on the missions is appointed to the cross-panel Collaboration Networks, resulting in development of needed (NATO) activities.

VII. TECHNICAL TEAM LEADER, PANEL MENTOR AND LEAD NATION:

Açıklama [KP(2]: I think panels should formulate this!

Lead Nation TBD

VIII. NATIONS/NATO ORGANISATIONS WILLING/INVITED TO PARTICIPATE:

NATO Office of the Chief Scientist; The NATO nations and organisations which are willing to participate: TBD All NATO nations and organizations are invited to participate; EOP nations are invited to participate; Industry is invited to participate (to explore cooperation);.

IX. NATIONAL AND/OR NATO RESOURCES NEEDED (Physical and non-physical Assets):

Nations will provide sufficient resources to get national participant to physical meetings. The activity will be supported and overviewed by NATO STB and CSO.

X. CSO RESOURCES NEEDED (e.g. Consultant Funding):

Meeting facility and administrative support. Allocate budget from the Support program for 2018.

Notes:

1. Please detach this key from TAP before completing.

2. The TAP needs to remain “Publicly Releasable” even if the activity is classified

KEY TO READING THE TECHNICAL ACTIVITY PROPOSAL FORM (1) Activity Reference Number: Sponsoring Panel/Group abbreviation (XXX) - Panel/Group serial number

(###). The Serial Number is provided by the Panel Office/MSCO. For example: AVT-048. For Cross-Panel activities, the Activity Reference Number is: Sponsoring Panel/Group abbreviation (XXX) - Main Supporting Panel/Group abbreviation (YYY) – Sponsoring Panel/Group serial number (###). For example: SAS-HFM-112. For Exploratory Teams, the Activity Reference Number is: Sponsoring Panel/Group abbreviation (XXX) - ET - Panel/Group serial number (###). For example: AVT-ET-060.

(2) State the type of proposed activity: Exploratory Team (ET), AGARDograph (AG), Long-Term Scientific Study (LTSS), Military Application Study (MAS), Multi-National Exercise (MNE), Research Lecture Series (RLS), Research Specialists’ Meeting (RSM), Research Symposium (RSY), Research Technical Course (RTC), Research Task Group (RTG), Specialist Team (ST) and Research Workshop (RWS).

(3) Subject title of the proposal. (4) Activity approval status: “TBA” (for “To Be Approved” - the Panel Office/MSCO will change it to year (####)

when approved by the STB, or by the CSO Director for STs and Panel/Group for ETs). (5) Activity start date: day, month and year (## / ## / ####). (6) Activity finish date: day, month and year (## / ## / ####). (7) Location(s) and dates where the activity will be held. Mandatory for RLSs and RTCs. For RTGs, LTSSs,

STs and MASs, initial meetings should be held preferably at CSO. (8) Abbreviation(s) of any other Panel/Group and/or any other NATO body whose involvement is desired in the

activity. For example, for other NATO Bodies, one could think of the Main Armaments Groups (NAAG, NNAG & NAFAG), the NATO Industrial Advisory Group (NIAG), the NCI Community (NC3B Sub-Committees and NCIA), the Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation (CMRE), etc.

(9) Security Classification level of the activity: RELEASABLE TO THE PUBLIC (previously marked as UU), NATO UNCLASSIFIED - NU, NATO RESTRICTED - NR, NATO CONFIDENTIAL - NC, or NATO SECRET - NS. This classification should be determined in conjunction with the definition of the expected partnership with non-NATO nations.

(10) State whether non-NATO nations are invited (YES) or not invited (NO) to participate in the activity. State YES if at least one non-NATO nation (see list hereunder) is invited to participate. If stating YES, please carefully fill in TAP Paragraph VI. In this paragraph, be especially clear if the invitation includes all PfP and/or all Mediterranean Dialogue nations, or only certain PfP nations (MD nations must be invited as a group). PfP Nations: Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Finland (EOP Nation), FYROM (Macedonia), Georgia, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Russia, Serbia, Sweden (EOP Nation), Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. MD Nations: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco, Tunisia Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) Nations: Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates; Saudi Arabia and Oman have also shown an interest in the Initiative. Global Partners: Afghanistan, Australia (EOP Nation), Iraq, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Pakistan

(11) Keywords: give some generic keywords.

April 2017 Edition


IST-xxx (1) Communication in contensted EW environment

APPROVAL

TBA

TYPE ET/SM (2) 2019

LOCATION(S) AND DATES (7) 2021


NCIA, NC3B, SCI, SET (8)


NATO CONFIDENTIAL? (9)

Non-NATO Invited

SWE/FIN (10)

KEYWORDS ED, EPM, robust communications, jamming, resilience (11)

I. BACKGROUND:

Recent exercises at the eastern border of the NATO territory, the presence in the Baltic States and the war in Ukraine have shown that Russia’s strategy on Electronic Warfare (EW) is successful. Both their Electronic Attack (EA) (eg. jamming) potential and their Electronic Support (ES) (eg. Target-localisation) show that current NATO tactical communication infrastructure is vulnerable for EW actions and will be severely challenged.

Current Electronic Defence (ED) actions are mainly focused on technical solutions for radios, such as hopping and spread spectrum techniques. It is doubtful whether this is enough to counter the presented threat. Therefor new paradigms for ED are required.

Russia’s doctrine by combining EW, RPAS and artillery to detect, identify, locate and eliminate high value units, proved very successful (Recce-Strike Complex).

The concept of heterogeneous MANET as studied in IST-124-RTG and IST-161-RTG might offer directions to protect the whole network instead of protecting a single radio. These studies primarily focus on efficient bandwidth usage and distribution of traffic. Countering the EW-threat requires a new way of looking at the concept.


Current NATO tactical infrastructure is severely challenged by current state of the art EA and ES possibilities. The last decade, this topic has been neglected, in view of the operations conducted and adversaries faced. Since NATO operations highly depend on information superiority, a robust tactical infrastructure is paramount.

Current military and commercial radio’s will probably fail in a conflict with Russia to such an extend that no communication is possible and seriously command and control is seriously hampered.

Even so, Russia’s doctrine of combined EW, RPAS and artillery poses a serious threat to our command chain, since commanding units are easily and quickly identified, located and eliminated.

This study aims to develop new concepts (using e.g. heterogeneous MANET as starting point) to protect the network against the current and future EW threat by:

- designing an infrastructure that can deal with severe jamming; - designing an infrastructure that masks high value units and/or important activities.

The solutions will probably affect the implementation of heterogeneous MANET or come to a different solution all together, therefore, in order to obtain interoperability the importance of cooperation and alignment within the treaty is obvious.


This study will:

- provide insight in the performance of heterogeneous MANET in EW contested environment; - provide concepts to improve jamming resilience; - provide concepts to mask locations of high value units;

To do this, it will consider multiple options and combine into a coherent concept. The main goal of this study is to combine promising solutions, analyses of several options (state of the art, strength and weaknesses, additional and enforcing techniques), combine them together into a concept, identify the main challenges and initiate new research on those. This might provide new TAPs on main challenges identified (which will probably include some of the topics already mentioned in the TAP. This way it could build a “house” of related research

Ideally these concepts should be tested in demonstrators against the current threat, e.g. during CWIX. However the classification of the results might require to do testing in a confined environment.


To provide the results described above, the following studies should be performed:

- Investigate the performance and behaviour of heterogeneous MANET in a realistic jamming environment.

- Investigate holistic solutions to cope with jamming. The following studies might provide partial solutions to the problem described and could be studied briefly in this activity or more thoroughly in a separate activity:

o Investigate possibilities to use routing techniques to avoid jammed channels. This requires an heterogeneous MANET with radio’s in many radio-bands. Since jammers are a target themselves, jamming won’t be continuous. Therefore, the infrastructure should be able to respond autonomously to jamming in different bands, with differing techniques and intensity.

o Investigate the effectiveness of multiple beamforming for terrestrial communication (e.g. phased array antenna).

o Investigate the possibilities of laser communication for terrestrial communication o Define interfaces between the network protocols and the different waveforms in the

heterogeneous network in order to both detect an attack as well as utilize the EPM modes of the waveforms in the best manner

o Investigate solutions to ignore signals not behaving as network-own signals. For example hardware solutions such as antenna’s automatically shielding directions where strange signals are coming from and software solutions neutralizing strange, not own, modulation formats.

- Investigate the possibilities of masking high value units in the network by changing the network behaviour (traffic shaping, network morphing) and the spectrum usage (prevent fingerprinting, all units behave the same).

- Investigate solutions to ignore signals not behaving as network-own signals. For example hardware solutions such as antenna’s automatically shielding directions where strange signals are coming from and software solutions neutralizing strange, not own, modulation formats.

- combines the promising solutions into a concept to cope with the described threat. o Investigate the consequences of above solutions to the network performance. o Investigate possibilities for automatic policy changes during the mission (resilience,

performance, masking, etc.).


This activity should cooperate with IST-161-RTG in order to align architecture and solutions.

- Check with SET, SCI for complentary studies and information on ES, EA and antenna’s; - Check with SCI-297-RTG; - Check with NCIA for up-to-date assessment of current and predicted adversary’s EA and ES

capabilities; - Check with NBWF community.


Results should be incorporated in the overall architecture and proposed for standardisation in the NC3O.

VII. TECHNICAL TEAM LEADER AND LEAD NATION:

NLD(?)


The following organisations are invited to participate:

CAT LOS, CAT N&S, NBWF community, …


tbd


tbd

Notes:

1. Please detach this key from TAP before completing.

2. The TAP needs to remain “Publicly Releasable” even if the activity is classified

KEY TO READING THE TECHNICAL ACTIVITY PROPOSAL FORM

(1) Activity Reference Number: Sponsoring Panel/Group abbreviation (XXX) - Panel/Group serial number (###). The Serial Number is provided by the Panel Office/MSCO. For example: AVT-048.

For Cross-Panel activities, the Activity Reference Number is: Sponsoring Panel/Group abbreviation (XXX) - Main Supporting Panel/Group abbreviation (YYY) – Sponsoring Panel/Group serial number (###). For example: SAS-HFM-112.

For Exploratory Teams, the Activity Reference Number is: Sponsoring Panel/Group abbreviation (XXX) - ET - Panel/Group serial number (###). For example: AVT-ET-060.

(2) State the type of proposed activity: Exploratory Team (ET), AGARDograph (AG), Long-Term Scientific Study (LTSS), Military Application Study (MAS), Multi-National Exercise (MNE), Research Lecture Series (RLS), Research Specialists’ Meeting (RSM), Research Symposium (RSY), Research Technical Course (RTC), Research Task Group (RTG), Specialist Team (ST) and Research Workshop (RWS).

(3) Subject title of the proposal. (4) Activity approval status: “TBA” (for “To Be Approved” - the Panel Office/MSCO will change it to year

(####) when approved by the STB, or by the CSO Director for STs and Panel/Group for ETs). (5) Activity start date: day, month and year (## / ## / ####). (6) Activity finish date: day, month and year (## / ## / ####).

(7) Location(s) and dates where the activity will be held. Mandatory for RLSs and RTCs. For RTGs, LTSSs, STs and MASs, initial meetings should be held preferably at CSO.

(8) Abbreviation(s) of any other Panel/Group and/or any other NATO body whose involvement is desired in the activity. For example, for other NATO Bodies, one could think of the Main Armaments Groups (NAAG, NNAG & NAFAG), the NATO Industrial Advisory Group (NIAG), the NCI Community (NC3B Sub-Committees and NCIA), the Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation (CMRE), etc.

(9) Security Classification level of the activity: RELEASABLE TO THE PUBLIC (previously marked as UU), NATO UNCLASSIFIED - NU, NATO RESTRICTED - NR, NATO CONFIDENTIAL - NC, or NATO SECRET - NS. This classification should be determined in conjunction with the definition of the expected partnership with non-NATO nations.

(10) State whether non-NATO nations are invited (YES) or not invited (NO) to participate in the activity. State YES if at least one non-NATO nation (see list hereunder) is invited to participate. If stating YES, please carefully fill in TAP Paragraph VI. In this paragraph, be especially clear if the invitation includes all PfP and/or all Mediterranean Dialogue nations, or only certain PfP nations (MD nations must be invited as a group).

PfP Nations: Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Finland (EOP Nation), FYROM (Macedonia), Georgia, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Malta, Moldova, Russia, Serbia, Sweden (EOP Nation), Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

MD Nations: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco, Tunisia

Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) Nations: Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates; Saudi Arabia and Oman have also shown an interest in the Initiative.

Global Partners: Afghanistan, Australia (EOP Nation), Iraq, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Pakistan

(11) Keywords: give some generic keywords.

June 2017 Edition

Technical Activity Proposal (TAP) Form


Inter-panel Inter-group workshop Big Data Challenges:

Situation Awareness and Decision Support

APPROVAL


START 2019

LOCATION(S) AND DATES TBC END 2019

COORDINATION WITH OTHER BODIES HFM, IST, N3CA, ACT and CMRE

NATO CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIVITY UU

PfP

PUBLICATION DATA Workshop Proceedings UU

KEYWORDS Big Data, Decision Support, Human Factors, Situation Awareness, Visual Analytics, and Visualization


There are many Research Task Groups (RTGs) under different NATO panels working on different aspects of defence, military and intelligence challenges, e.g. big data exploration, cyber defence, decision support, mission planning, human factors, medicine, modelling and simulation, visualization and visual analytics etc. Bringing members of the different RTGs together in a workshop will enable them to explore and benefit from each other’s work and develop collaborations to complement and enhance their respective efforts, as well as facilitating the sharing of data, tasks and tools. Visual analytics / visualisation together with modelling and simulation and other forms of analysis techniques / tools, supported by human factors, are key enabling elements which provide a possible link to bring together these disparate groups.

II. OBJECTIVE(S):

Visual analytics, visualization and other forms of analysis tools and techniques, together with human factors, may provide effective potential solutions to support users in exploring, analysing and understanding vast, complex and dynamic Big Data sets, and thus support users in the intelligence, defence and cyber domains with situation awareness and decision making. We propose a three-day inter-panel / inter-group workshop to bring together the members from the different RTGs from the six different panels and the NATO Modelling and Simulation Group. This will provide the means for the RTG members to present, discuss and share their work, problems and challenges in relation to the exploration, exploitation and utilization of massive, complex and dynamic Big Data in their respective tasks and mission domains. The workshop will result in raised awareness of their common and different problems, technologies, capabilities and efforts, and the development of collaborations. Outcomes will include potential joint inter-panel / inter-group collaborations, sharing of data, tools and tasks, as well as the generation of new research ideas and RTG TAP proposal(s).


The topics will include but, not be limited to: • Applied vehicle technology • Cyber defence and security • Challenges in Big Data exploration / exploitation • Decision Support • Evaluation frameworks, measures and metrics • Genomics

• Human Factors

• Human cognition and perception

• Medicine

• Mission planning • Modelling and simulation • Sensors and electronic technology

• Situation awareness • System analysis and studies • System concepts and integration • Visual Analytics • Visualization • etc.

IV. DELIVERABLE/ END PRODUCT

Workshop proceedings


Dr. Margaret Varga (GBR) and Prof. Bronkhorst.


GBR, The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Turkey, Lithuania, USA. NATO Nations and Bodies

PfP Nations: all invited


N.A.

VIII. CSO RESOURCES NEEDED:

Funding for two keynote speakers and one TER.

DRAFT version 1.0


IST-XXX-XX

ACTIVITY TITLE

CyberPsychology

APPROVAL TBA

TYPE RLS START

(5)

FOCUS GROUP A2IS END (6)

LOCATION(S) AND DATES Norfolk, Bordeaux, … (7)


ACT Innovation Hub (8)


(9) Non-NATO Invited

Yes

KEYWORDS Cyber, Psychology, HUMINT, Human Capital, Trust,

I. BACKGROUND:

Cyber Psychology is a developing, complex scientific field. With increasingly more smart and

autonomous machines, it has become apparent that new forms of psychology are to be observed and

studied, studies that will examine the way humans and machines interact, but also impact each other.

Man/Machine Teaming, Human Automated Teaming (HAT) are now valid fields of research and of

development. The development of new forms of relationship between humans is seen by some as a

solution to cope with human problems, while it is for others a threat to the future of humanity.

Either way, the cybernetic world keeps transforming humans and it will increasingly do so in the future.

In this context, the humans of tomorrow will have to further develop a psychology in relation to machines

but also a psychology of machines, AI and/or hybrid robots. Cyber Psychology is at the crossroad of two

main fields: psychology and cybernetics, both being relevant to Defense and Security and to all the

areas which NATO prioritizes to prepare its transformation.

Two obvious use cases are (i) Clinical (AR/VR to address post traumatic disorder), (ii) Influencing

strategies, but there’s more than that.


Topic Sub-Topic Relevance to NATO

Cyber => Psychology

VR/AR

Education Huge potential impact on military education and training

Therapy Supporting troops mental health

Influence An expanding environment for influencing operations

Cyber skills vs social skills

NATO needs to leverage a human capital rich in cyber, social

and operational skills. This is expected to become more

challenging.

Psychology => Cyber Society/culture

Rise of non-state actors

Transform the nature of the threat


The primary objective of this lecture series is to share state of the art knowledge/experience on the

many facets of the (CyberPsychology) topic.

A secondary objective is to identify possible RTG’s


This RLS will aim to cover:

a. CyberPsychology (relevance to): Cyber operations

Who to recruit for cyber operations

How to train the people for cyber environment and operations

How to create an environment that reduces threat

How to incentivize, build trust in cyberspace

…

b. CyberPsychology (relevance to): HUMINT

Artificial Intelligence - future source for HUMINT?

A polygraph capability in cyber ... to be able to identify if the identity of a social-media user is a

fake or a real one based on communication script (stylometry)? …

c. CyberPsychology (relevance to): Human capital

Education and training (people, but also impact on NATO facilities)

Effects on decision making processes

Do different media affect fake news differently, In what kind of communities do fake news

spread the fastest?

Cultural sensitivity when sending soldiers abroad?

…


ACT-Innovation Hub

HUMINT COE (Oradea, Romania)

HFM Panel

IST-159 Cyber Intelligence and Social Media

IST-157 Human Considerations in AI for C2

…


Unregulated space NATO could face Issues of all sorts stemming from unregulated

cyberspace (legal, ethical, financial, criminal, subversive, …)

Trust While trust between people within cyberspace is a field that

has been developing for a while, trust in AI has to be

addressed too.

Hackers Identification/ profiling

The science of identifying, understanding and profiling hostile

actors within cyberspace is developing. It can be nurtured and

leveraged.

Psychology Cyber HAT, Man Machine Teaming

future military capabilities should be envisaged through a

human-machine teaming approach.


This is a mandatory section (No TBD permitted).


The NATO nations and organisations which are willing to participate: ACT Innovation Hub, France,

The NATO nations and organisations which are invited to participate: All NATO Nations and Bodies, PfP Nations and STO Enhanced Opportunity Partners (EOP)

The non-NATO nations which are invited to participate: PfP Nations and STO Enhanced Opportunity Partners (FIN, SWE, AUS).


Nations will provide sufficient resources to get national participant to the meeting.


Potential meeting support at CSO for hosting the Lecture Series.


ACTIVITY REFERENCE

NUMBER IST

ACTIVITY TITLE

Social Media Exploitation for Psychological Operations

APPROVAL

TYPE AND SERIAL

NUMBER RTG

START

Jan 2019

LOCATION(S) AND DATES Various END

Dez 2022

COORDINATION WITH OTHER BODIES IST and possible SAS, HFM

NATO CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIVITY Up to NS Non-NATO Invited

Yes ( = FIN, SWE)

PUBLICATION DATA

Report and demonstrator for exploitation of social

media to support winning the hearts and minds of

populations in peace, tension and war.

NS

KEYWORDS Social Media, Big Data, PSYOPS, Misinformation, Forensics, NW-Analysis, Forensics,

High level Electronic Warfare, InfoOps-Architecture, Deterrence, Counter Information


Traditionally Psychological Operations (PSYOPS), that is, ‘winning the hearts and minds’ of a population have

been conducted using traditional information channels such as: radio stations, dropping leaflets, doing projects

supporting the community such as building schools, distributing clothing, etc. However, with the proliferation of

networks and technologies, including social media applications that have become part of the everyday life of a

significant proportion of the world’s population, a new set of channels for PSYOPS has been created. Use of

mobile phones and social media sites (from Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, LinkedIn to Pokémon Go) make

people susceptible to influence by advertisers, political activists and state actors, to name a few. NATO and

Alliance Nations are also susceptible as parties may try to influence its military and civilian populations,

Research is being conducted on the technical vulnerabilities within cyberspace; however, an emergent vector for

viable attack is via the cognitive layer through social media.

The social media arena provides a never before seen affordance:

a. Attacks can occur on a global scale or target right down to an individual;

b. Adversaries are able to attack from anywhere in the world; and,

c. The amplification effect and speed of dissemination is staggering.

d. counter argumentation doesn’t help – the wrong information lingers in memory

This phenomenon poses many new challenges for military intelligence operators, such as detection of PSYOPS

influence attacks (misinformation, propaganda, fake news), but also exploitation opportunities by PSYOPS

operators to successfully influence target populations to understand the value of Western society and democratic

values.

We have seen how effective this channel can be. For example, social media has been used by ISIS for recruiting

and radicalization of western fighters and by Russia for propaganda prior to and during kinetic operations in

Ukraine.

NATO needs to understand, how information and communication technology is dual use in the sense of serving

benign and malign purposes on a national and global scale. The versatility und ubiquity greatly enhances their

appeal for intelligence collection, military operations, covert actions, and clandestine signaling. Adversaries

turning these capabilities into effective and dependable weapons present the major challenge we have to face.

Developing and maintaining defensive countermeasure is critical for cutting down own vulnerabilities and

weaknesses concerning these weapons. Quantitative and qualitative methods, and operational and strategic level

analysis should be combined to develop a new framework to act in this domain.

This activity can be seen as a follow-on study to RTG-IST-159 investigating the capabilities to manipulate the media

landscape enabled by leveraging ever-evolving networked tools. Currently NATO has no equivalents to establish any

deterrence or efficient protection against psychological warfare.

OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this research is to understand this space and investigate potentially relevant methods and

technologies for use by intelligence analysts in order to provide situational awareness, indicators and warning,

and intelligence to commanders as well as investigating potential tools for PSYOPS operators that might be used

to augment traditional channels.

II. TOPICS TO BE COVERED:

1. Exploration of attack vectors and effects of social media influence attacks

2. Intelligence opportunities in this layer

3. Fake News and Propaganda-Recognition

4. Analytics for segmenting target populations for maximum influence opportunity

5. Understand tools for injection of PSYOPS information into social media streams

6. Exploration of relevant technologies and tools

7. Understand the System Architecture for Operational InfoOps and effects evaluation.

8. Transfer Electronic Warfare means to the Information Warfare level

9. Develop counter measures and defence options and techniques,

10. Develop a concept for a reliable deterrence

III. DELIVERABLE (e.g. S/W Engage Model, Database,…) AND/OR END PRODUCT (e.g. Final Report):

A technical report explaining the possibilities and potential impact of the exploitation of social media channels

for PSYOPS purposes.

IV. TECHNICAL TEAM LEADER AND LEAD NATION:

TBD

V. NATIONS WILLING/INVITED TO PARTICIPATE:

DEU willing to participate.

VI. NATIONAL AND/OR NATO RESOURCES NEEDED (Physical and non-physical Assets):

There will be a requirement for a shared collaborative space for sharing of publications and a test platform both at the

NATO SECRET level.

VII. CSO RESOURCES NEEDED (e.g. Consultant Funding):

Funding for attendance of commercial vendors and experts to attend task group meetings as required.

Meeting space for RTG first meeting as required within NATO establishments.

DRAFT version 1.0


IST-XXX-XX

ACTIVITY TITLE

Trust in information

APPROVAL TBA

TYPE RSM START

(5)

FOCUS GROUP END (6)

LOCATION(S) AND DATES (7)


(8)


(9) Non-NATO Invited

Yes

KEYWORDS

I. BACKGROUND:

The NATO Specialist’s Meeting on Processing, Exploitation and Dissemination (PED) applied to Maritime Situational Awareness (MSA) – initiated under the NATO Maritime Security Initiative – identified “Trust in Information” as a priority MSA-PED theme. Trust is a human-centric concept. Many factors will impact trust in MSA information, such as the pedigree of the information, or a better quantification of the uncertainty associated with the information. In order to assess which aspects of the information enterprise can have the biggest impact on trust, it is recommended that a multi-disciplinary team be put together to identify the current state of research of relevance to trust in information and what research should be pursued to address information components of highest potential impact on trust and ultimately on decision making. As the topic of trust is becoming prominent within the IST (and other) communities, this activity should provide a framework to bring coherence to new/arising proposals in this area.


A better understanding of the various components affecting trust in information, and a path towards a common quantification of those components, should lead to greater trust in shared information, and greater operational decision making.


The primary objective is to identify which components of MSA information enterprise may be impacting trust and establish a way forward for NATO activities to address potential solutions.

Note: depending on interest, the RSM could be based on use cases other than MSA.


This RSM will aim to identify:

a. Attributes of trust

b. Trust in the system, prediction, and the information

c. Doctrine for trust


SAS-114-RTG (Communication of uncertainy).



This is a mandatory section (No TBD permitted).


The NATO nations and organisations which are willing to participate: TBD

The NATO nations and organisations which are invited to participate: All NATO Nations and Bodies, PfP Nations and STO Enhanced Opportunity Partners (EOP)

The non-NATO nations which are invited to participate: PfP Nations and STO Enhanced Opportunity Partners (FIN, SWE, AUS).


Nations will provide sufficient resources to get national participant to the meeting.


Potential meeting support at CSO for hosting the RSM.



IST- ACTIVITY TITLE

Secure Underwater Communications for

heterogeneous network enabled operations

APPROVAL TBA


SM START 2018

LOCATION(S) AND DATES TBD END 2xxx

COORDINATION WITH OTHER BODIES CMRE

NATO CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIVITY NATO RESTRICTED Non-NATO Invited

No

PUBLICATION DATA NU

KEYWORDS Secure, Underwater, Submarine, AUV, Autonomy, MANET, Communications


As underwater communications are developing across several NATO nations, it is clear that we must remain interoperable in this domain; due to the nature of undersea operations it is of critical importance that these communications must remain secure and assured.

Furthermore with the advent of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) becoming more prevalent and cost effective; a mobile undersea network can be enabled to allow secure data transfer from one nation to another.

The initial list of benefits that will be enabled by enhanced underwater communications is:

Improved range and coverage of Underwater communications

Safer operations in the underwater domain, such as Mine Countermeasure, Anti-Submarine Warfare and Search and Rescue.

Rapid deployment and repair of underwater networks

Increased resilience and assurance of underwater signalling

II. OBJECTIVE(S):

This TAP is aimed at developing common standards for Underwater Communications and Networking.

The task will aim to develop common use cases, network architectures and protocols to enable the improved underwater connectivity..

This task should be supported by any available studies, modelling, analysis or trials results available from the contributing nations or open source material on secure underwater communications.


IV. DELIVERABLE (e.g. Model, Database,…) AND/OR END PRODUCT (e.g. Final Report):

Report on the development of common UW Communications standards and applications to joint NATO operations


Chair: Alex Hamilton (or Joao Alves, CMRE / Ivor Nissen, Germany)

Lead Nation: UK


Nations that have shown interest in participating are: UK,US, NLD,NOR, DEU, POR

PfP nations invited:


Experts in areas mentioned above funded for preparing for and attending a recurring Specialist Meeting (2-4 days), and developing interoperable protocols and architectures.


Standard publishing support

tek.hİz.: 27698691-0570- -18/arge ve teknj.d....

Documents