Feili Yu*, Candra Meirina*, Sui Ruan*, Fang Tu, and Prof. Krishna R. Pattipati*

*Dept. of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Connecticut

Contact: krishna@engr.uconn.edu (860) 486-2890

10th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium June 13 - 16, 2005

Integration Integration of Holarchy and Holonic Scheduling Conceptsof Holarchy and Holonic Scheduling Concepts

for Cfor C2 2 Organizational DesignOrganizational Design

C2 Requirements for Unpredictable and Dynamic Mission Environments

Traditional C2 Structures

Holonic Reference Architecture (HRA)

Illustrative Example: Holonic Scheduling

Summary and Future Work

OutlineOutlineOutline

Special Operation Control

Special Operation Control

Intelligence OperationControl

Intelligence OperationControl

Combat ZoneControl

Combat ZoneControl

Mission PlanningMission Planning JointOperations Planning

JointOperations Planning

Area DefensiveOperation ControlArea Defensive

Operation Control

Area OffensiveOperation ControlArea Offensive

Operation Control

Weapons SystemControl

Weapons SystemControl

Logistics OperationControl

Logistics OperationControl

CommandCommandControl

• Disperse organizational center of gravity among war-fighters ⇒ transfer organizational control to the lowest level

• Shift from a rigid centralized control – decentralized execution ⇒ flexible decentralized control – decentralized execution

• Broaden war-fighters’ operational autonomy while maintaining overall missionobjectives

⇒ Un-couple the organizational command and control

C2 Requirements for Unpredictable and Dynamic Mission Environments

CC22 Requirements Requirements for Unpredictable and Dynamic Mission Environmentsfor Unpredictable and Dynamic Mission Environments

Pros:• Unity of command• Efficiency under predictable conditions

Cons:• Limited ability to reconfigure in novel

situations• Rigid hierarchy ⇒ Slower response and

limited immediate actions in the face of major disturbances

• Multi-level bureaucratic structure⇒ Limited information flow

Pros:• Structural flexibility• Fast response to local disturbances

Cons:• Absence of global information ⇒ Limited

performance • Unpredictable organizational behaviors• Low efficiency of market-based negotiation

mechanism ⇒ slow decision process• Limited emergent behaviors• Potential for chaotic behaviors

Can traditional C2 structures meet the challenges?Can traditional CCan traditional C22 structures meet the challenges?structures meet the challenges?

How do we overcome the drawbacks of the hierarchy and the heterarchy?

Holonic Reference Architecture (HRA) – 1 HolonicHolonic Reference Architecture (HRA) Reference Architecture (HRA) –– 1 1 HolarchyHolarchy::• Combine positive features of hierarchy and heterarchy and

mitigate their shortcomings: (a) ability to model very complex systems; (b) high resiliency to internal and external disturbances; (c) adaptability to changes in the environment

• Un-couple commandcommand and control:control:•• Command:Command: Operational Level Control (OLC)•• Control:Control: Tactical Level Control (TLC)

• Decentralize control ⇒ empower ‘edges’ of organizations• Integrate the overall system ⇒ ensure unity of command

Key Features of HRA

• Autonomy – distributed authority and control ⇒ facilitate local situation awareness, local decision-making, …⇒ reactive and proactive behaviors

• Integration – top-down authority and control flow ⇒ unity of command

• Cooperation – supervised coordination and negotiation mechanisms ⇒ flexible interaction among units⇒ minimum degree of disorders

• Self-Organization – ability to cope with small shifts as well as major disturbances in mission environments

• Flexibility – individual units can be cloned or deleted as necessitated by the mission demands

Functionality of OLC HolonsOperational holon (OPH)Responsible for mission decomposition, mission monitoring and supervising

Intelligence holon (INH)Manage data collection, data fusion, and intelligence assessments

Planning holon (PLH)Oversee deliberate planning, resource apportionment, task allocation, and set mission deadlines

Coordinating holon (COOH)Direct individual unit efforts to ensure efficiency

Promulgating holon (PRH)Disseminate plans and directions

Communication holon (COMH)Facilitate communication

Operational Level Control (OLC)• Provide facility for mission decomposition, deliberate planning, global supervision, inter-unit

coordination, …• Focus on overall mission objectives (“commander’s intent”)• Aim to provide a force structure of sufficient size that apportion subordinate units at the right place and

at the right time• Oversee mission progression and facilitate necessary adjustments

Holonic Reference Architecture (HRA) – 2 HolonicHolonic Reference Architecture (HRA) Reference Architecture (HRA) –– 2 2

Functionality of TLC HolonsTactical holon (TAH)Coordinate local units to work together to achieve local objectives

Situational holon (SIH)Provide local situational awareness

Scheduling holon (SCH)Manage local activities (schedule) for all units under the TLC authority

Negotiation holon (NEH)Coordinate with other TLC units and provide local conflict resolution

Asset holon (ASH)Provide interface facility between TLC units and the physical assets

Communication holon (COMH)Provides communication facility

Negotiation Holon

Scheduling Holon

Situational Holon

Comm. Holon

Asset Holon

Tactical Holon

To OLC

Schedule

Negotiation Protocol

Command

Battle Status

Situational Pattern

Tasks

Res.

request

To TUs

Sub-mission

Tactical level control (TLC) architecture

Tactical Level Control (TLC)• Provide facility for local scheduling, local situation awareness, negotiation mechanism and conflict

resolution, and interface to physical assets• Focus on local sub-mission objectives • Facilitate system flexibility ⇒ modular TLC units

Holonic Reference Architecture (HRA) – 3 HolonicHolonic Reference Architecture (HRA) Reference Architecture (HRA) –– 3 3

MissionMission: Assign a joint group of Navy and Marine Forces to capture Seaport and take Airport to allow for the introduction of follow-on forces. Utilize two suitable landing beaches: North Beach with a road leading to the Seaport; and South Beach with another road leading to the Airport. Intelligence sources report existence of hostile forces and potential counter-strikes.

Input to OLC

= aggregated defend task, showing possible subtasks

= aggregated encounters task, with possible subtasks

= mission tasks (that must be done); known in advance

START

5. Encounters• SMine• Sea(Pb)*

6.TAKEHILL

7.TAKEN. BCH

8.TAKES. BCH

11.Encounters on S/P roadClear:• GMINE• TANK

12.Encounterson A/P road

9.Defend N. BCH• ARTY• FROG• Helos

13.CLEARSAMs*

14.CLEARSAMs*

15.TAKEPORT

16.TAKEA/P

1. CVBG• Silk*• Air(S)*• Sea(Pb)*• Sea(Sub)

3. Re-supplyPORT No.

• Sea(Pb)*

2. ARG

4. Re-supplyPORT So.

10.Defend S. BCH

17. Encounters

• GTL*18.BLOWBRIDGE

END

• ARTY• FROG• Helos

• Sea(Pb)*

• Silk*• Air(S)*• Sea(Pb)*• Sea(Sub)

Clear:• GMINE• TANK

Intermediate output of

Operational Holon

Illustrative ExampleIllustrative ExampleIllustrative Example

T1. CVBG

T2. ARG

T6. Hill

T3. Re-supply

Port N

T5. Encounters

N&S

T4. Re-supply

Port S

T7. Take N.

Beach

T17. GTL

T18. Blow

bridge

T8. Take S. Beach

T9. Defend N. Beach

T10. Defend S. Beach

T11. S/P Road

T12. A/P Road

T13. SAM seaport

T14. SAM airport

T15.Seaport

T16.Airport

Priority=1 Priority=3Priority=2 Priority=4 Priority=6Priority=5

Holonic Scheduling (Step 1)Deliberate Planning (output of OLC-Planning Holon)

• Optimal number of TLC units ⇒ 4

• Sub-mission assignment to each TLC unit

• Asset allocation to each TLC unit

• Deadlines for tasks

Task Priority Graph

Final output ofOLC-Operational Holon

Holonic Scheduling (Step 2)Operational Level-Planning (multi-units)

• Coordinating Holon: Distributes the central plan to each local TLC units

• Intelligence & Coordinating Holons: Monitors local TLC plans and ensures feasibility of the global plan

• Operational Holon:Responds to disturbances and directs TLC units for plan revisions

T3 T15 T16

T5

T6

T11

T12

T17

T18 T14T13

TU 1

TU 2

T2

T1

T4 T7 T8

T9

T10

TU 3

TU 4

Coordinated Tasks Task Execution Sequence for each TLC Unit

Output of OLC-Coordinating Holon

T5

T18

Holonic Scheduling – 1HolonicHolonic Scheduling Scheduling –– 11

Time UnitAssets 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

P1P15P18P19P3P7P11P14P17P20P2P10P12P16P4P5P6P8P9P13

T8 T10T9 T10

T8

T4 T5 T7 T8

T1

TU 4

T5T7

T7

T13 T14T6

TU 3

T1 T2T1 T2T1 T2

T11 T12T17 T18

T16

TU 2

T6T6 T17 T11 T12 T13 T14

T5

T16T18T18 T15 T16

TU 1

T3 T18 T15

T15

Feasible Schedule Coordinating Schedule Infeasible Schedule

Holonic Scheduling (Step 4)Reactive Scheduling• Monitors feasibility of local

TLC schedules• Reinstates feasibility of the

global schedule from infeasible local schedules

• Propagates adjustments to related TLC units ⇒ local schedule regeneration based on new constraints

Feasible Schedule

Holonic Scheduling (Step 3)Tactical Level Scheduling

⇒ Distributed process ⇒ Each TLC unit generates

sequential decisions based on local constraints, information, and objectives (e.g., minimizing make-span)

Assets 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10P1

P15P18P19P3P7

P11P14P17P20P2

P10P12P16P4P5P6P8P9

P13 T9 T10T10

T18

T7

T7

T7

T8

T8T8

T14

T2T2

T4

T5

T5

T1

T6T1T1

T2

T17

T11

T11

T13

T13T12T5

T1

T6 T12T17 T14

T16

T16T15

T6T16

T15

T3 T15T18T18T18

TU 3

TU 4

TU 1

TU 2

Time Unit

Infeasible schedule due to precedence constraint violation

Holonic Scheduling – 2HolonicHolonic Scheduling Scheduling –– 22

Introduce Holonic Reference Architecture (HRA) to model C2 processes in unpredictable and dynamic mission environments

Un-coupled command and control ⇒ unity of command in a decentralized control systemOperational Level Control (OLC) provides a facility for mission decomposition, deliberate planning, command promulgation, and inter-unit coordination ⇒ unity of command Tactical level control (TLC) oversees local scheduling, battlefield pattern recognition, and negotiation; and provides an interface to physical resources ⇒ decentralized control

Numerical example shows that the C2 HRA exhibits capability to detect and recover from schedule infeasibility ⇒ illustrate capability to cope with mission changes andensure unity of commandThe illustrative example highlights the potential for HRA to facilitate integration of centrality and autonomy; rigidity and flexibility; doctrine and adaptability ⇒ suitable for modeling C2 organization in the information ageFuture Work

Apply HRA principles to develop better analytical models of hierarchy, heterarchy, and holarchy, as well as, of the mission environmentUtilize HRA to model existing and future systems (e.g., Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) and FORCEnet).

Summary and Future WorkSummary and Future WorkSummary and Future Work

Thanks!