Semantics, Interoperability,Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium & SICoP

John Yanosy (Rockwell Collins) – Chair Semantic Interoperability Framework WG Hans Polzer (Lockheed Martin) – Chair SCOPE WGTodd Schneider (Raytheon)

2

Agenda

NCOIC Introduction NCOIC & Interoperability Interoperability & Semantics

– Semantic Interoperability Framework WG

Interoperability & Big Picture– SCOPE WG

URL’s – NCOIC – http://www.ncoic.org

– SICoP - http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP

3

NCOIC Vision & Mission

Vision

Mission

Our mission is to facilitate the global realization of Network Centric Operations.  We seek to enable interoperability across the spectrum of joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multinational industrial and commercial operations.  NCOIC is global, with membership open to those who wish to apply the vast potential of network centric technology to the operational challenges faced by our nations and their citizens.

InformationArchitectureComm & NetworkingArchitecture

System A

System B

System C

NCO

Industry working together with our customers to provide a network centric environment where all classes of information systems interoperate by integrating existing and emerging open standards into a common evolving global framework that employs a common set of principles and processes.

4

Broad Membership– Currently 100 Member Organizations from 19 countries, including

• Leading IT, Aerospace & Defense companies• Government organizations • Non-Governmental Organizations• Academic Institutions

Experienced Advisory Council– 24 key global government and civilian customers– Representatives from Australia, France, Germany, Italy, NATO,

Sweden, UK, & the US

Growing Government Relationships– ASD(NII), Australia DoD, DHS, DISA, European Defence Agency,

FAA, JFCOM, NATO, SPAWAR, Swedish FMV (The Swedish Defence Materiel Administration)

NCOIC - At A Glance

5

NCOIC Membership ComesFrom These Countries

Australia Canada

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

ItalyIreland

Israel

Netherlands

Poland

Romania

Spain

South Korea

Sweden

Switzerland

Turkey

United Kingdom

United States

NCOIC welcomes global membership

Belgium

6

100 Member Companies& Organizations in NCOIC

Just a few of the names that you might recognize…Just a few of the names that you might recognize…Just a few of the names that you might recognize…Just a few of the names that you might recognize…

7

Affiliate Council

Members

Executive OperationsCommittee

Technical Council

Functional Teams&

Working Groups

Strategy Committee

MarcomCommittee

Membership Committee

Executive Council Advisory Council

Staff

Executive Director

NCOIC Organization

8

Functional Teams

Building Blocks Functional Team (FT): Identifies elements that help enable interoperability for interested stakeholders. Products identified as an “NCOIC Certified Interoperability Building Block” can be trusted to exhibit NIF-identified characteristics of interoperability.

Integrated Project Teams (IPTs): Customer-facing teams whose role is to aggregate the technical deliverables of the various technical functional teams in support of specific customer missions.

Modeling, Simulation, Testing and Evaluation FT: Utilizes techniques and laboratories to test, validate and / or demonstrate increased levels of interoperability resulting from use of NCOIC deliverables. Demonstrates effectiveness of NCOIC concepts and deliverables to foster interoperability between NCOIC member and government labs.

Net-Centric Assessment FT: Develops tools for use by systems engineers to determine the level of Netcentricity that has been achieved in systems. The Net-Centric Assessment Tool (NCAT™) exists as both an engine for performing assessments, and independent content files for use in operational domains.

NIF Architecture Concepts FT: Develops enabling guidance that system engineers can use to develop systems-of-systems capabilities. This construct consists of architectural principles, patterns, and Protocol Functional Collections (PFCs).

Requirements Validation FT: Develops and promotes models and practices useful to customers and member companies for validating requirements in a network centric environment.

Specialized Frameworks FT: Identifies specialized frameworks and patterns compliant with the guidelines, content, and scope specified by the NIF™. The team populates the NIF library with PFCs that are consistent with the NCO tenants and other technical principles, focusing on specific technical domains affecting network centric interoperable architectural solutions.

Systems Engineering and Integration FT: Integrates efforts and promotes NCOIC FT deliverables for

accomplishing NCOIC goals and objectives.

9

NCOIC Terms

Network-Centric:– Related to systems and patterns of behavior that are influenced

significantly or enabled by current and emergent networks and network technologies. Often these center around IP-based internetworking, but the term is sometimes used to include any type of enabling network.

Network-Centric Operations (NCO):– An information superiority-enabled concept of operations that

generates increased combat power by networking sensors, decision makers, and shooters to achieve shared awareness, increased speed of command, higher tempo of operations, greater lethality, increased survivability and a greater degree of self-synchronization.

Net-Centricity necessarily requires interoperability

10

NCO Theme

"Net Centricity A full contact Social Sport"

Hans Polzer (Lockheed Martin)

11

NCOIC & Interoperability

(DOD/NATO) The ability of systems, units, or forces to provide services to, and accept services from other systems, units, or forces and to use the services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively together. (Joint Pub 1-02)

(DOD only) The condition achieved among communications-electronics systems or items of communications-electronics equipment when information or services can be exchanged directly and satisfactorily between them and/or their users. The degree of interoperability should be defined when referring to specific cases. (Joint Pub 1-02)

(NATO) The ability to operate in synergy in the execution of assigned tasks. (AAP-6 [2005])

(IEEE) … the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged

(Wikipedia) Interoperability is connecting people, data and diverse systems. The term can be defined in a technical way or in a broad way, taking into account social, political and organizational factors.

12

Interoperability & Semantics

Hypothesis No ‘true’ interoperability without Semantic interoperability

Semantics is everywhere – Between people– Between organizations– Between people and systems– Between systems and sensors– Between systems– Between software elements– Between protocols– Between network services and clients, users of services– Between information systems and creators/users of information– Between different organizations and expectations about uses of systems

and information– Between definitions of concepts between people in different contexts

13

Semantic Interoperability Framework

Working Group

John Yanosy, Chair

14

Semantic Interoperability Framework (SIF) WG Charter

This project will develop the NIF Semantic Interoperability (SIF) Framework, a sub-framework of the NCOIC NIF overarching framework. The SIF framework in this context will include:

Development of an evolving technology and capability map of all of the relevant concepts and technologies associated with this domain,

Development of a clear and unambiguous definition of semantic interoperability,

Identification and description of the impact that various levels of semantic interoperability can have on networked operations,

Evolution of an overarching semantic interoperability model, Identification and taxonomic classification of the semantic interoperability

problems and examples of within various applications, Development of semantic interoperability principles and tenets, Identification and development of semantic interoperability architecture

patterns. Emerging technology concepts will also be discussed as to their scope of

problem solution and possibly their maturity level and related standards.

15

SIF WG Objectives

Develop a comprehensive understanding of the problems of semantic interoperability in a NCO environment

Define a semantic interoperability framework (SIF) where the scope and role of each problem can be illustrated and where problem specific architectural pattern solutions can be integrated (Services, Situational, and Knowledge Sharing domains)

Investigate, describe, and provide guidance in the use of semantic technologies and standards that supports mutually consistent understanding of shared information

Develop NCO Capability Specific Semantic Interoperability Patterns

Semantic Interoperability Concept Map

Develop Semantic Interaction Model

– Based on speech acts

– Characterizing intention (sufficient for NCO)

Lexicon

16

SIF Concept Map

Context

Knowledge

Interoperability

SemanticInteroperability

Semantics

Context RepresentationSemanticWeb

Assertive

CommunicativeSpeech Act

KnowledgeRepresentation

SemanticWeb

Services

Ontology

Standards

RepresentationLanguage

Logic

DescriptionLogicOWL Modal Logic

First Order Logic

Reasoning Abductive

Inductive

Analogic

Deductive

InformationModelTheory

Interpretation

Metadata

OntologyMapping

Domain Knowledge

Common Knowledge

DistributedKnowledge

Situation

Common Logic

typeof

Networked Entity

typeoftypeof

typeof

hashashas

Intention

typeof

Collaborative Network has

has

Capability Role

modeledBy

describes

Directive

Commisive

Declarative

Expressive

Semantic Interactions

typeof

has

uses

hastypeof

requires

Web

extends

uses

requiresuses/provides

uses

Grammar

ExplicitSemantics

ImplicitSemantics

typeofhas

typeof

Vocabulary

ConceptsLexicon

Social/Cultural

has

typeof

typeof

has

has

representsIn

provides

formalizes

Inference

typeof

actsOn

Referents

classifies

has

has

typeof

typeof

has

correspondsWith

has

enables

supports

entails

relates

hashas

has

Namespaces

hasextends

modeledBy

Query

Perspective

Granularity

TemporalSpatial

has

Semantic QueryLanguage

IntensionalLogic

typeof

Epistemic Logic

deontic Logic

typeof

Type Theory

typeof

typeof

typeof

17

Ope

ratio

ns

Ling

uist

ics

Philosophy

NCOIC Semantic Interoperability Space

Knowledge

Representation

Computer Science

Cognitive Systems

SystemsEngineering

SI

Net CentricOps

Lo

gic

18

NCOICSemantic Interoperability Principles

Interoperability between systems and agents is – Purposeful – Informed by goals, – Operating in contexts – Sharing domain knowledge (whether explicit or implied).

Goals guide selection of intentions and execution of actions

Communications occur within a few universal intentional categories (Speech Acts – request knowledge, commit to action, request action, … )

Context constrains relevant domain knowledge for a situation

Useful Knowledge is organized in semantic domain models

19

Systems, Capabilities, Operations, Programs,

and Enterprises(SCOPE)

Model

Hans Polzer, Chair

20

SCOPE WG Charter

─ Develop and evolve means to characterize requirements for network centric systems

─ Work with Engineering Process Team, IPTs and NCAT WGs to enable and learn from application of this characterization means to actual capability development

Measures of Effectiveness

Measures of Satisfaction

Size, Weight, Power, Cooling

EnvironmentCost & Schedule

Miscellaneous (the “ilities”)

Maturity and Risk

Measures of Performance

Measures of Net-Centricity

SCOPE MODEL

21

What is the SCOPE Model?

SCOPE Purpose– Describe the degree a set of Systems supports a Capability,

Operation, Program or Enterprise (SCOPE) over a network

SCOPE provides a means to characterize interoperability requirements for network centric systems– How isolated or connected are the systems/organizations to each

other?

– How isolated or connected are the systems/organizations to their environment?

– What are the intended purposes of the connection between systems?

– How feasible is the system?

22

NCO Layers of Interoperability

Data/Object Model InteroperabilityData/Object Model Interoperability

Connectivity & Network Interop.Connectivity & Network Interop.

Physical InteroperabilityPhysical Interoperability

Semantic/Information InteroperabilitySemantic/Information Interoperability

Knowledge/Awareness of Actions

Aligned ProceduresAligned Procedures

Aligned OperationsAligned Operations

Harmonized Strategy/DoctrinesHarmonized Strategy/Doctrines

Political or Business ObjectivesPolitical or Business Objectives Organizational Interoperability

Organizational Interoperability

Technical Interoperability

La

yers

of

Inte

rop

era

bili

ty

NetworkTransport

Information& Services

People &Process

NEEDS

CONSTRAINTS

23

SCOPE Model DimensionsBroad & Specific

Net Readiness Dimension set– Measures how open and adaptable component systems are to

working with each other over the network

Capability Scope Dimension set (two)– One for DOMAIN SPECIFIC characteristics,

One for DOMAIN INDEPENDENT characteristics– Measures how broad, deep, and diverse the operational architectures

are that the systems are designed to support and adapt to

Technical Feasibility Dimension set– Measures how feasible it is to achieve desired operational capabilities,

given the systems and their information exchanges over the available network using established technical standards and infrastructure services

24

Scope Dimensions – Version 1

25

DoDAF Architecture Viewsand SCOPE Dimensions

OPERATIONALVIEWS

SYSTEMVIEWS

TECHNICALSTANDARDS

VIEWS

Identifies Participant Relationships and Information Needs

Relates Capabilities & Characteristics to

Operational Requirements

Prescribes Standards and Conventions

BROAD

NARROW

CAPABILITY SCOPE LEVELS

• Which Systems Interact?

• About What?• How Much?

(and Why?)• To What Effect?

HIGH

LOW

TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

LEVELS• Can Capability be

achieved with Current Stds & Technologies?

• Are New Stds or Changes Needed?

• Is the informationObtainable,Accurate, timely?

NET-READY LEVELS

• What do Systems say to each other?

• How is this information represented?

OPEN

CLOSED

26

Examples of Net-ReadySCOPE Dimensions & Levels

Value

Dimension

Tighter Coupling / Less Net-Readiness

Looser Coupling / More Net-Readiness

Service Discovery Service specs

pub at design

Service specs

pub run-time

OWL spec for

Services

Comparative

service select

Information Discovery Static Indexes Metadata Navigation Relevance Measures Context-driven Search

Info Model Pre-Agreement

Complex data & doctrine

Standard XML Schemas

Business Object ASCII, URLs

Information

Assurance

Link encrypt -

SSL

Single sign-on

support

DoD-Wide

PKI support

MSL, cross-

domain spprt

Autonomic Networking Design Time Configuration

Run Time Re-Configuration

Dynamic Net Management

Adaptive Net Management

Semantic Interoperability

No Explicit Semantics

Semantic Metadata for Interfaces

Ontology-based interfaces

Dynamic Ontology mapping

27

Examples of Capability-IndependentSCOPE Dimensions and Levels

Overall Scope and Types of Enterprise

Single Unit Single Service or Agency DoD-Wide World-Wide

Capability Breadth Single Functional Domain/Service

Multi-Domain, Multi-Service

Multi-Dept, NGO, Industry Coalition, Multi-Enterprise Type

Capability Depth Single Level Two Levels Three Echelons Four or More Echelons

Organizational Model and Culture

Rigid Hierarchy, Vertically Integrated

Adaptive Hierarchy, Interact Horizontally

Flat, Empowered, Open to Partnering

Adaptive, Social, Interdependent

Unity of Life Cycle Control/Alignment

Single DoD Acquis. Exec Multiple DoD Acquis. Exec DoD & US Syst. Owners Multi-National Syst. Owners

Acquisition Congruence (SD) All Systems on Same Timeline

Timeline within 2 years Timeline within 5 years Timelines >5 years apart

Semantic Interoperability Single Domain Vocabulary Multi-Domain Vocabulary Single Language Multiple Languages

Operational Context (SD) Single Ops Context Multiple Ops Contexts Future/Past Integration Hypothetical Entities

Value

DimensionNarrower Scope Broader Scope

28

Examples of Technical FeasibilityDimensions

Inter-System Time Binding to Achieve Capability

Strategic Tactical Transactional Real Time

Run-Time Computing Resources Needed

<1% of existing system resources

1-10% 10-50% >50% of existing system resources

Service Mgmt. Resources Needed

Negligible Within Current Net Service Capacity

Within Planned Net Service Capacity

Beyond Planned Net Service Capacity

Net Resources Needed (FD)

Negligible Within Current Net Capacity

Within Planned Net Capacity

Beyond Planned Net Capacity

Interface Development Complexity

<1% of system size 1-10% 10-50% >50% of system size

Technology Readiness Level

For Net Use

TRL Levels 8-9 TRL Levels 6-7 TRL Levels 4-5 TRL Levels 1-3

Value

Dimension

Smaller Risk Larger Risk

29

SCOPE Model Summary

SCOPE is a comprehensive, balanced approach to assessing sets of systems from a net centric operations perspective– Evolved through application against real programs

– Yet has an overarching perspective on the problem space, semi-orthogonal to architecture frameworks (FEAF, DoDAF, Zachman, etc.)

SCOPE is a “Goldilocks” model– No preconceived value for any given degree of net-centricity

– Value depends on operational objectives of target system sponsors• Desired degree of agility• Desired degree of operational/resource scope

SCOPE has potential to be a net-centric content-based complement to CMMI to characterize what is built vice how– But focused more on “best fit” to the problem domain rather than

“maturity” or “level” based

Helps position programs/systems in the larger ecosystem of institutional goals and capabilities; Identifies interoperability gaps

30

NCOIC – http://www.ncoic.org

SICoP - http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP