|
Training Cognitive Situational Awareness for Multi-Platform Command and Control
Navy SBIR 2009.2 - Topic N092-136 NAVSEA - Mr. Dean Putnam - dean.r.putnam@navy.mil Opens: May 18, 2009 - Closes: June 17, 2009 N092-136 TITLE: Training Cognitive Situational Awareness for Multi-Platform Command and Control TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Sensors, Battlespace, Human Systems ACQUISITION PROGRAM: Undersea Warfare – Decision Support System (USW-DSS) ACAT II The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their country of origin, and what tasks each would accomplish in the statement of work in accordance with section 3.5.b.(7) of the solicitation. OBJECTIVE: Develop methodology and tools to measure and train cognitive skills necessary to maintain USW Strike Group Situational Awareness DESCRIPTION: The battle-space in which a USW Strike group operates is quite complex and variable. Subtle changes in situation attributes such as ship’s speed or water temperature can reduce sensor performance, necessitating re-positioning resources. Maintaining situational awareness in these difficult, changing conditions is essential for Strike-Group Commanders to make timely and effective tactical decisions. Innovative approaches and new computer-based tools are required for training commanders and their staffs, in order that they develop and maintain the skills necessary to discover and exploit in-situ information for tactical advantage. Effective training techniques should assess and feedback the operator’s understanding of the situation, and through his resultant actions, assess his understanding of impacts, priorities and tactics. An innovative Situation Awareness Metric Assessment Tool (SAMAT) that goes beyond conventional on-board and classroom trainers is required to ensure Strike Group commanders and their staffs maintain the proper operational readiness for C2 applications. Proposed SAMAT components will integrate with tactical software to provide "Freeze In Action" and "Step through Action" situational assessment capabilities with both playback and simulated data. Successful efforts will use Audio/Video inscription techniques to capture operator inputs and actions combined with Subject Matter Expert analysis via After Action Review (AAR). Assessment tools developed under this SBIR will provide quantitative metrics to measure tactical situation knowledge including but not limited to, environment factors, validated threats, potential threats, blue forces position, performance predictions and vulnerabilities. The tools will measure and assess cognitive situation awareness skills such as task management, information discovery and filtering, prioritization, perception, attention span, memory, and preparedness. PHASE I: Develop approach and candidate algorithms; demonstrate feasibility of proposed approach and algorithms to address Command and Control training in complex variable environments. PHASE II: Develop prototype software for metrics assessment tool. Creates scenarios that require tactical reactions based on significant or subtle changes in the situation. Conduct proof of concept tests. Assess performance of tools and algorithms using quantitative measures of performance. PHASE III: Integrate the situation awareness metric assessment tool into the USW-DSS Classroom Trainer, or other Command and Control trainer specified by the US Navy. PRIVATE SECTOR COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL/DUAL-USE APPLICATIONS: REFERENCES: 2. Maier, H. N., & Taber, K. H. (in press). Measurement of initiative in high-speed tactical decision making. In R. Hoffman (Ed.), Expertise out of context: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making. 4. Adkins, R., W. Murphy, M. Hemenway, R. Archer, and L. Bayless 1995 Hardman III Analysis of the Land Warrior System. Army Research Laboratory Technical Report ARL-CR-1995. Dynamics Research Corporation: Andover, MA. 5. Endsley, M.R. (1995) "Measurement of Situational Awareness in Dynamic Systems". Human Factors, 37(1) 65-84. 6. Buck, J.R., and B.H. Kantrowitz 1983 Decision Making. Pp. 428 ff in B.H. Kantrowitz, and R.D. Sorkin, eds., Human Factors: Understanding People-System Relationships. New York: Wiley. 7. Bystrom, K; Jarvelin, K. Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Inform Proc Manag. 1995;31:191–213. KEYWORDS: Training, Situational Awareness, Cognitive, Simulation, Tactical, Human Behavior
|