Attachment 2 DASH 3 GBC SOO.pdf

Transformational Model – Battle Management Generate Battle Courses of Action (GBC) Decision Advantage Sprint for Human-machine teaming (DASH) event Statement of Objectives (SOO)

1.0 Objective

Decision Advantage Sprint for Human-Machine-Teaming (DASH) events provide support for ABMS Transformational Model - Battle Management and an opportunity to learn about and explore different AI/autonomy approaches for meeting command and control (C2) decision advantage requirements.

Furthermore, the events aim to ensure warfighter involvement in the development of AI/autonomy and further identify areas where autonomy would help a Joint All-Domain (JAD) Battle Manager. The teams also hope to make connections with industries that are also working on Battle Management autonomy functions.

2.0 Scope

The DAF Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) Cross Functional Team (CFT) (AF/A57RB) and Air Force Research Laboratory, 711 Human Performance Wing (711 HPW) will host a Transformational Model – Battle Management Generate Battle Courses of Action (GBC) Decision Advantage Sprint for Human-machine-teaming (DASH) tentatively scheduled for 15 – 26 September 2025 at the Howard Hughes Operations (H2O) Center in Las Vegas, NV. An “Ask Me Anything” for this event is planned for 25 July 2025 at 1100 Eastern / 0800 Pacific. Participants will be limited based on resource and space constraints, and selected participants will be notified by 13 August 2025.

2.1 Transformation Model

Deriving effective C2 capability development toward decision advantage requires a clear understanding of what C2 decisions are. The ABMS CFT provides a quantitative model for the Joint Warfighting Function of C2 as the Battle Command, Battle Plan, Battle Analysis and Battle Management decision domains. Each of these decision domains are decomposed in the Transformational Model for Decision Advantage (TM) using model-based systems engineering which bring these C2 decisions to light in a detailed manner. The TM describes military decisions being made within a human-machine team (HMT), including specific choices within these domains and the battlespace information needed to inform said choices. Therefore, the TM provides foundational requirements for C2 decision-making that are universal (agnostic to time epoch, process, geography, organization, doctrine, among others). Additional information on the TMs can be found at: SAM.gov

The Transformational Model – Battle Management (TM-BM) is comprised of 13 distinct and orthogonal subfunctions (Figure 1) deduced from the following operational environment (OE) assumptions/axioms:

• No entities exist in identical states simultaneously.

• Force distributions in the OE are not uniform.

• The OE evolves over time.

• Information is incomplete and uncertain.

• Missions are difficult and resources are constrained.

https://sam.gov/opp/a6f8e78859cd45d294a8df70906c90f5/view

Figure 1: Transformational Model – Battle Management Subfunctions.

In OEs where these assumptions apply (which will be the case for the pacing challenge), the TM- BM subfunctions explain the comprehensive set of battlespace information elements and decisions an HMT must make to battle manage the battlespace. Consequently, TM-BM reveals measures of performance and give structure to a design of experiments that best characterize a battle management HMT. The resulting analysis delivers C2 decision advantage requirements to military capability developers and acquisition professionals through rigorous defensible analysis.

3.0 Technical Requirements

Emerging C2 solutions focus on decision support (i.e., system interoperability, information exchange, and information presentations, i.e., battlespace awareness/display) and do not directly address decision advantage (i.e., software that machine-assists/automates battle management decision-making). To win against a peer adversary, the joint force must achieve decision advantage by equipping C2 HMTs with automation to sort through complex and high-volume battle management decisions with faster tempo and improved decision quality.

3.1 Decision Advantage Sprint for HMTs (DASH)

During the DASH, participating software development teams will witness a battle management crew making GBC battle management decisions in a simulated combat environment. The participating software developers will then apply the Transformational Model (the functional description of C2 decision-making) and their creativity in developing an application/microservice that helps the humans make faster and higher quality battle management decisions. Battle management warfighters will team with coders to provide operational perspective and feedback. Some warfighters may originate from allied nations. At the end of the DASH, each development team will have the opportunity to demonstrate how their software affects overall human-machine team decision making during a culminating experiment. Experiment results and the list of participants will be shared with government stakeholders. Invited participants will retain their intellectual property (IP), including any changes made over the course of the week. Government stakeholders reserve the right to analyze all collected sprint data (including software performance and technical integration insights) to derive, refine and mature functional and technical C2 software requirements.

3.2 GBC Decision Function

While perhaps streamlining and expediting battlespace information transport and display, current and emerging C2 systems still foist battle management decision-making on the humans. One of these decision functions is “Generate Battle Courses of Action” (GBC).

GBC takes a matched effect-effector set output from a “Match Effectors” decision (i.e., the principal effect, deliverable(s), & effector(s)), determines what other effect(s) support the principal effect, and builds a web of events representing the actions necessary for the principal effector(s) to achieve the principal effect, and for all participants to arrive in some post-execution disposition.

The GBC DASH aims to answer the following core questions:

• How many decision opportunities are recognized/missed?

• How fast can the HMT make its decision?

• How accurate or error free are the HMT’s decisions?

• How confident is the human operator in the HMT’s solution?

• What are some technical software attributes/requirements that must be considered along with the functional requirements?

Since GBC is expected to generate more courses of actions than manual data collection and analysis processes can derive insights, a hypergraph may be the best presentation of COAs and associated paths. Software attributes will be assessed based on HMT decision speed, correctness, completeness, and user experience.

4.0 Other Requirements

4.1 OPSEC

The technical research areas under this contract shall be specified per task order. At minimum, the contractor shall provide OPSEC protection for all sensitive/critical information and indicators involved in execution of this contract/Task Order, as defined by AFI 10-701 (Operations Security). 711 HPW Critical Information and Indicators are protected under the 711 HPW Operations Security Program and the 711 HPW Critical Information and Indicators List (CIIL).

Contractor employees granted access to critical information and indicators will be provided initial OPSEC training by the 711 HPW OPSEC Coordinator upon in- processing and prior to being

GBC

Generate BattleCOAs granted access to CIIL items related to the contract/Task Order. The contractor will also participate in 711 HPW's annual OPSEC training and education programs, which includes periodic updates and refresher training on CIIL items applicable to the contract/Task Order. The 711 HPW OPSEC coordinator will evaluate the OPSEC posture of AF contract activities and operations.

All contractor personnel require a minimum of a Tier 1 background check (T1)/SF85 for any position that requires access to the internet, use of automated information systems to cover standalone computers or unescorted entry into restricted or controlled areas prior to reporting for duty in support of any requirement. The investigation is not for a security clearance; it is for a position of trust. This is mandatory requirement set forth in DoDM 5200.02_AFMAN 16-1405, Air Force Personnel Security Program. All documentation required for security certification shall be the responsibility of the contractor.

Contractors shall complete the customer-provided Intelligence Oversight training as required by customer requirements and will report any Questionable Intelligence Activity (QIA), Significant/Highly Sensitive Matter (S/HSM), and/or Federal Crimes IA W procedures established in DoD Directive 5148.13, Intelligence Oversight, and AFI 14-104, Intelligence Oversight. For contracts involving cryptographic matters in addition to DoDD and AFI reference, USSID 18, Legal Compliance and US. Persons Minimization Procedures.

4.2 O&M Fiscal Considerations

To satisfy the Purpose Statute, proposed funding must be proper for the work to be performed (31 USC Sec. 1301 & DoD FMR, vol. 14, ch. 2, para. 020202.B.). The scope/purpose of the contract must be analyzed to ensure the use of O&M funds is proper and not an Anti-Deficiency Act violation. IAW the DoD Financial Management Regulation, RDT&E will finance research, development, test and evaluation efforts, including procurement of end items, weapons, equipment, components, materials and services required for development of equipment, material, or computer application software.

Transformational Model – Battle Management Generate Battle Courses of Action (GBC) Decision Advantage Sprint for Human-machine teaming (DASH) event Statement of Objectives (SOO)