uast * and evolving systems of systems in the age of the black swan part 1: class 1 and class 2...
DESCRIPTION
UAST * and Evolving Systems of Systems in the Age of the Black Swan Part 1: Class 1 and Class 2 Agile System Concepts. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 1
UAST * and Evolving Systems of Systems in the Age of the Black Swan
Part 1: Class 1 and Class 2 Agile System Concepts
Excerpts from a presentation at
UAST Tutorial Session, ITEA LVC Conference,
12 Jan 2009, El Paso, TX.
* UAST: Unmanned Autonomous Systems Test
“The overall concept of operations for UAST must […be] an evolutionary model that takes into account the rapid advancement of technology development in UAS. In aggregate, the UAS technology sector advantage is manifesting on a time scale of 2-4 months for next generational improvements. DoDI 5000.2 E 12.7 states, ‘Program managers shall employ a Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) to design for affordable change, enable evolutionary acquisition, and rapidly field affordable systems that are interoperable in the joint battle space.’
BAA UAST0002, A-4 UAST Concept of Operations, p 54.
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 2
A Note on Black Swans
The Black Swan metaphor is used currently to signify a low probability but catastrophic event. Popular usage emphasizes this low probability.
What is ignored in many examples of recent black swan eventsis that they have been enabled by situational evolution, and
will occur with increasing frequency.
It is accurate to see them as unprecedented…having rarely if ever occurred before.
It is inaccurate, in many cases,to think they are equally unlikely to occur again.
Contributing elements of situational evolution:Globalism, ubiquitous networks, technological literacy, empowered individuals,
4th and 5th generation warfare, complex interconnected systems, …
read: Nassim Nicholas Taleb, The Black Swan, Random House, 2007see: www.charlierose.com/view/interview/9713
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 3
Unmanned (Autonomous) Systems
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 4
0.4 gram camera and transmitter of the
DelFly micro
Weight 3 grams.10 cm tip-to-tip.Speed 5 m/sec.Flies 3 mins on 1 gram battery.
Dragonfly-likeMicro Air Vehicle(MAV)
www.delfly.nl/?site=DIII&menu=media&lang=nlJuly 2008
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 5
World's Largest Truck Goes Robotic
Nov. 6, 2008 -- The largest truck in the world is about to become the largest robotic vehicle in the world. Computer scientists from Carnegie Mellon University have teamed up with engineers from Caterpillar to automate the 700-ton trucks, which are made to haul loads up to 240 tons from mines.That's nearly two million pounds of metal, fuel and stone powered by a 3,550-horsepower, 24-valve engine moving at up to 42 miles per hour, with software and a robot at the wheel.
Fully automated mining trucks promise to reduce maintenance costs while
increasing productivity. By running at peak capacity 24 hours a day, seven
days a week, the trucks could be up to 100 percent more productive
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/11/06/monster-robot-truck.html
(Hack these and send an army of themon your own mission – a James Bond plot?)
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 6
Problems to Address in UAS TestSituation…• UAS technology advancement is accelerating on a broadening front.• UAS technology is becoming truly autonomous.• Impatient demand for replacing the human in harm’s way.
Testing must deal with…• Behaviors of lethal UAS that interact with their environment.• Groups that will cooperate on joint missions (swarms/teams/etc).• Groups composed of different types/technologies/ages .• Very large groups.• Ensuring safety of testers and test facilities.• Ensuring safety of surrounding communities and properties.• Expected emergent behaviors – these are necessary and hopefully good.• Expected unintended consequences – these are inevitable and may be good.• Completion in 60 days or less, or the warfighter will use it untested.
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 7
capabilitycomplexity
systemgeneration
nover designed
initially
Time
systemgeneration
n+1never
quite goodenough
requirementsestablishedfor gen n+1
develop
cut-over
requirementsestablishedfor gen n+2
effectivenessgap
situationcomplexity
sysgenn+2
ROIfailure
Increasing Gap BetweenNeed and Capability
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 8
Defining Agility and MigrationUsing the term as intended in the 1991 OSD
funded Lehigh study and subsequent research:Agility is effective response
under conditions of uncertainty
There are at least three components to agility:situational awareness,decisive choice making andthe ability to respondThe latter aspect is what we deal with here
Migration is the crossing of a changein basic infrastructure, be it technical, organizational or strategic.
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 9
Contemporary Context
Next-generation challenges are demandingnew architectures… Force Transformation is the U.S. military’s
response to next-generation warfareService Oriented Architectures is Enterprise
response to next-generation competition
Significant in both is the objective of a change that enables future change
Instead of perpetuating the scrap and replace cycle, an architecture is envisioned that facilitates migration through successive next generations
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 10
Response requirements categories (4 reactive and 4 proactive elements):Reactive: correction, variation, expansion,
reconfigurationProactive: creation, improvement, migration,
modification
Response performance metrics (4 elements):Response: cost, time, quality, scope
Response-enabling design principles (10 elements):Encapsulation, Compatibility, Reusability, Redundancy/Diversity, Scalability,
Distributed, Loose, Deferred Commitment, Self-Organizing, Evolving Standards
Design quality principles (3 elements):Requisite Variety, Parsimony, Harmony
An overarching architectural philosophy (3 elements):Reusable modules Reconfigurable in a Scalable architecture (RRS)
System integrity responsibilities (4 elements):Module Inventory, System Re-configurationModule Evolution/Mix, Infrastructure Evolution
An architectural conceptual pattern:Drag-and drop modules in a plug-and-play infrastructure
RAP – 7 Thought-Guiding Frameworks
*RAP: Response Ability Principles
*
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 11
Response requirements categories (4 reactive and 4 proactive elements):Reactive: correction, variation, expansion,
reconfigurationProactive: creation, improvement, migration,
modification
Response performance metrics (4 elements):Response: cost, time, quality, scope
Response-enabling design principles (10 elements):Encapsulation, Compatibility, Reusability, Redundancy/Diversity, Scalability,
Distributed, Loose, Deferred Commitment, Self-Organizing, Evolving Standards
Design quality principles (3 elements):Requisite Variety, Parsimony, Harmony
An overarching architectural philosophy (3 elements):Reusable modules Reconfigurable in a Scalable architecture (RRS)
System integrity responsibilities (4 elements):Module Inventory, System Re-configurationModule Evolution, Infrastructure Evolution
An architectural conceptual pattern:Drag-and drop modules in a plug-and-play infrastructure
current focus
RAP – 7 Thought-Guiding Frameworks
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 12
Proactive Response CategoriesPr
oact
ive
Domain Definition and General Issues
Proactive changes are generally triggered internally by the application of new knowledge to generate new value. They are still proactive changes even if the values generated are not positive and even if the knowledge applied is not new – self initiation is the distinguishing feature here. A proactive change is usually one that has effect rather than mere potential; thus, it is an application of knowledge rather than the invention or possession of unapplied knowledge. Proactive change proficiency is the wellspring of leadership and innovative activity.
Make or eliminate something. Issues are generally involved with the development of something new where nothing was before, or the elimination of something in use.
Incremental improvement. Issues are generally involved with competencies and performance factors, and are often the focus of continual, open-ended campaigns.
Foreseen, eventual, and fundamental change. Issues are generally associated with changes to supporting infrastructure, or transitions to next generation replacements.
General Characteristics
Addition or subtraction of unique capability. Issues are generally involved with the inclusion of something unlike anything already present, or the removal of something unique.
Creation(and
Elimination)
Improvement
Modification(Add/Sub
Capability)
Migration
From: Response Ability – The Language, Structure, and Culture of Agile Enterprise
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 13
4 Integrity Responsibility ElementsThe “active” parts of the infrastructure
1. System assembly: Assembly of modules into on-demand system configurations suitable for addressing unique response needs (unit tests, UAS swarm tests, heterogeneous UASoS tests).
2. Module inventory: Maintaining ready-for-use sufficient inventory of modules (testing people, test procedures, test monitors, reusable test suites, etc)
3. Module evolution/mix: New module addition and upgrade as new capabilities are needed (new tester skills, new test modules, new test procedures, new test equipment, etc)
4. Infrastructure evolution: improvements to existing rules and standards, new rules and standards, elimination of obsolete rules and standards, etc.
The “passive” parts of the infrastructureare the interoperability standards
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 14
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
(UAST)
personnel DoD rangesequipmentsensorstests
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 15
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
(UAST)
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
personnel equipmentsensorstests DoD ranges
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 16
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Plug-and-Play EvolvingPassive InfrastructureRules/Standards/Principles
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
(UAST)
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
personnel equipmentsensorstests DoD ranges
Security StdsTraining Stds
High Level Arch
Safety Stds
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 17
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Plug-and-Play EvolvingPassive InfrastructureRules/Standards/Principles
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
Plug-and-Play Evolving Active InfrastructureResponsible-Party Designation
System assembly: Who?
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
(UAST)
personnel equipmentsensorstests DoD ranges
Security StdsTraining Stds
High Level Arch
Safety Stds
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 18
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Plug-and-Play EvolvingPassive InfrastructureRules/Standards/Principles
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
Plug-and-Play Evolving Active InfrastructureResponsible-Party Designation
System assembly: Who?
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
(UAST)
Component inventory: Who?
personnel equipmentsensorstests DoD ranges
Security StdsTraining Stds
High Level Arch
Safety Stds
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 19
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Plug-and-Play EvolvingPassive InfrastructureRules/Standards/Principles
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
Plug-and-Play Evolving Active InfrastructureResponsible-Party Designation
System assembly: Who?
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
(UAST)
Component inventory: Who?Component mix: Who?
personnel equipmentsensorstests DoD ranges
Security StdsTraining Stds
High Level Arch
Safety Stds
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 20
Agile System: Class 1Reconfigurable
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Plug-and-Play Evolving Active InfrastructureResponsible-Party Designation
Plug-and-Play EvolvingPassive InfrastructureRules/Standards/Principles
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
Infrastructure evolution: Who?System assembly: Who?
Component mix: Who?Component inventory: Who?
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
(UAST)
personnel sensorstests equipment DoD ranges
Security StdsTraining Stds
High Level Arch
VR Immersion StdsSafety Stds
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 21
Plug-and-Play Evolving Active InfrastructureSystemic Regulation
Plug-and-Play EvolvingInterOp Passive InfrastructureRules/Standards/Principles
Infrastructure evolution: What?System assembly: What?
Component mix: What?Component inventory: What?
Examples of TypicalReconfigurable/ScalableSystem Configurations
Drag-and-DropReusableComponents
Variety/Time/Maturity/Range/Increments/Migrations/Evolutions/etc
Agile System: Class 2Reconfiguring
(UASoS)
UAS mission coordination sensorstasks
Ethical Stds
Behavior StdsCooperation StdsEngagement Stds
Comm Stds
architectural concept pattern: drag-and-drop, plug-and-play
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 22
UAST Program ManagerTest ManagerRange Master
indicative configurations of test varieties
Multi-Range UAS Testing System(highly stylized architectural concept pattern)
From: Embedding Agile Security in Systems Architecture, 2008. INSIGHT 12(2):14-17, INCOSEwww.parshift.com/Files/PsiDocs/Pap090701Incose-EmbeddingAgileSecurityInSystemArchitecture.pdf
sensors test equip ranges
UAS policy/stdssafety stds
full system testsub-sys test swarm system test
UAST Program Manager12
34
5
test config stdsHLA interop stds
security policy
Four active responsibilities, each with embedded security
personnel as integrated collaborative team members.
As an emergent propertysecurity does not come in a separate box, e.g., personnel are security trained, equipment is self-secure.
Test system assembly is constrained by test configuration standards informed by security policy.
Security policy informs allother passive infrastructure standards, and evolves simultaneously with each.
activ
e
pass
ive
personneltestsprocedures …et al.
INFR
AST
RU
CTU
RE
Security is embedded in architecture at points 1-5. Additionally, encapsulated components have internal security distrustful of other components in general.
component mix:
infrastructure evolution:test sys assembly:
component inventory:
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 23
amplifiers playback units(tape, CD, DVD) )
speakers video displays(TV, computer)
content sources(TIVO,P2P)
Infrastructure evolution:
System assembly:
Component mix:
Component inventory:
Power Analog interconnect Physical connection
Infrastructure
Video media Net in/outAudio tape
Modules
IntegrityManagement
Active
Passive
‘90s
Industry Assocs
User/Owner
MfgrsStores
Video/Surround Digital/Internet
‘40s/’50s ‘00sroughly…
signal tuners
Crossing Next-Generation Life Cycle Boundaries for Home Entertainment Technology Migration
“On How Agile Systems Gracefully Migrate Across Next-Generation Life Cycle Boundaries” www.parshift.com/Files/PsiDocs/Pap080614GloGift08-LifeCycleMigration.pdf
Rules/Standards
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 24
routers DNS Serversswitches end points,NICs, NOMs
appliances(eg, xml)
Infrastructure evolution:
System assembly:
Component mix:
Component inventory:
Wire standards NCP
InfrastructureIPv6era
Modules
Rules/Standards
IntegrityManagement
Active
Passive
’80s/’90s
IETF
Subnet Owners
Vendor CommunityVendor Community
TCP/IPv4
’70s ’00/’10srough operational start…
filters(eg IDS, Firewall)
Optical stds
IPv4era
NCPera
Wireless stds
Crossing Next-Generation Life Cycle Boundariesfor Internet Protocol Migration
“On How Agile Systems Gracefully Migrate Across Next-Generation Life Cycle Boundaries” www.parshift.com/Files/PsiDocs/Pap080614GloGift08-LifeCycleMigration.pdf
IPv6
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 25
Lessons from Home Entertainment and Internet Migration
Both employ strict capabilities-based encapsulation. This is necessary, and facilitates migration by enabling functional swap-out, upgrade, and retirement independently and asynchronously.
Both employ a stable passive infrastructure of form-and-content interconnect standards, which is structured to facilitate open-ended augmentation over time with both additional and alternate-option standards. This is necessary, and facilitates migration enabling capability and capacity additions.
Both employ an active infrastructure of stable responsibilities for the evolution of both components and passive infrastructure. This is necessary, and facilitates migration by sustaining controlled evolution.
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 26
Relating Home Entertainment and Internet Agile Migration toForce Transformation and SOA Initiatives
The difference between a Class 1 and Class 2 RAP-based agile system is centrally-controlled sustainment vs. self organizing sustainment. In Class 1 systems specific people with centralized sustainment responsibilities can be named, in Class 2 systems sustainment is caused by the equilibrium-seeking self-reorganization of decentralized interactions among autonomous agents. Home Entertainment fits more a Class 1 profile – the owner that configures systems very centrally controls the system configuration, and has little effect or influence on owners of other Home Entertainment systems.Internet Protocol fits more a Class 2 profile – there is a greater degree of coupling between the migration-deciding agents. As subnets opt for IPv6 profiles, other interconnected subnets may become shunned for services of lesser security or less optimal interaction.SOA and Home Entertainment environments share a characteristic that may be useful in guiding SOA adoption plans. Both occur in relative isolation to their greater communities, and resemble a Class 1 agile system. Force Transformation, on the other hand, has an environmental profile more like the Internet Protocol model. Both have sizable sub-groups with interdependent couplings – looking somewhat like an ecological system in the large.
(demonstrating domain independence of principles)
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 27
Force Transformation
Force Transformation is a massive undertaking, on many functional fronts within each military force as well as across the many independent but interdependent military forces of Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard.
Force Transformation is predicated on developing far more intimate interoperability than currently exists.
The magnitude of the effort necessarily requires an asynchronous adoption for economic, cultural and technological reasons as a minimum – without any disruption of capability.
The military has a tradition of controlled mandated actions that may not serve well in either the initial adoption or the subsequent continual evolution intended.
The model of Internet Protocol migration that relies on pulling self-organized adoption with enticing benefit, rather than forcing a change that may be incompatible with the reality of the status quo, might well provide both economic and speed-of-adoption advantages.
(demonstrating domain transference of principles)
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 28
SOA Adoption
Adoption and subsequent migratory evolution of SOA within an enterprise is largely a local (enterprise) decision, with little interdependence on when and what other enterprises choose to do.
Though enterprises are increasingly networked to each other electronically as well as strategically, SOA is largely an internal infrastructure for enterprise IT support of business practices. Perimeter gateways of various types are standard methods for reconciling inter company transactions.
The nature of the SOA infrastructure nevertheless must conform to greater community common/universal standards if maximum and sustainable access to component services of benefit are to be realized.
This raises a cautionary flag on brand-unique infrastructure employment, as well as enterprise- or brand-unique service interfaces.
(demonstrating domain transferrence of principles)
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 29
Systems in Context
Class 1testing
system(s)
Class 2systems
under test
Class 2(federated?)
testingenterprise
environment(an ecology)
PoliticsTechnology
Govt ProceduresMil proceduresMilitary realityCompetitors
EnemiesUAST UASoS
Domain Independent Principles Can Inform UAST ConOpssystem
systems
systems
[email protected], attributed copies permitted 30
DeliveryTime
Development
PerceivedEffectiveness100%
Gen 2 OperationGen 1 Operation
agile system
InfrastructureMigration
Module MixModifications
DeliveryTime
Development
PerceivedEffectiveness
life-cycle end
Agile system would continue ROI,but does age, and can suffer
strategy-lapse integrity failure
100%
In-agile system
OperationDevelopment
Relating Agile Development to Agile Operations www.parshift.com/Files/PsiDocs/Pap080404Cser2008DevOpsMigration.pdf
Agile Systems Gracefully Migrate Across Next-Generation Boundaries www.parshift.com/Files/PsiDocs/Pap080614GloGift08-LifeCycleMigration.pdf