Inactive

Background: The Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Ground (RAS-G) Interoperability Profile (IOP) is a modular open systems interface standard for robotic ground systems. The RAS-G IOP is managed by Army... Background: The Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Ground (RAS-G) Interoperability Profile (IOP) is a modular open systems interface standard for robotic ground systems. The RAS-G IOP is managed by Army Project Manager, Force Projection (PM FP) and the Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC) and has evolved over the last 10 years from IOP Version 0 (V) in 2011 to IOP V5 (now in final draft pending OPSEC review for release). The RAS-G IOP was developed with government-industry working integrated product teams (WIPTs) and with industry review. PM FP has fielded several IOP compliant systems and continues to apply IOP Instantiation Documents as interface requirements for its RAS-G programs of record. This RFI seeks to solicit additional feedback from those in industry who have utilized IOP, implemented it on their systems, or feel that they have useful interfaces that should be evaluated for inclusion in future IOP versions. RAS-G IOP documentation is available upon request to industry via the National Advanced Mobility Consortium (NAMC). For companies who are not part of the NAMC consortium, documentation can be made available by contacting the RFI POC. Responses can be submitted in any format. 1. Please provide positive and negative experiences in working with the IOP and IOP tools, such as the IOP Conformance Verification Tool (CVT). 2. Please provide any recommended improvements in existing IOP services and tools. 3. Please identify any new IOP services needed to take advantage of mature innovations that are being worked on by your company. 4. Beyond waypoint following, leader/follower (including dismount/person following), and retrotraverse (return home), what advanced mobility features does the IOP need to support? 5. Are current systems able to execute complex missions, including conditional behaviors and looping patterns, autonomously without input from the controller or human operator? If so, how are these complex missions issued to the platform? 6. In Version 5, the IOP introduced support for complex mission descriptions centered around the Coalition Battle Management Language (CBML). Please provide positive and negative experiences in working with CBML, or any other standard or proprietary mission description language. 7. Do you have a plan on converting your Autonomy Solutions to Robotic Operating System 2 (ROS2)? If, so do you have any feedback from current efforts? 8. Do you have any experience implementing standards referenced in IOP, i.e. Society of Automotive Systems, Aerospace Group 4 (SAE AS-4), J1939, Integrated Sensor Architecture (ISA), Unmanned System (Uxs) Control Segment (UCS), etc.? Do you have any recommendations for improvements or additions that would be needed either in IOP documentation or the standards themselves for Robotic & Autonomous Systems – Ground? 9. Do you have any feedback on the network and radio service and message sets defined in the IOP Communications profile? GENERAL INFORMATION: The U.S. Government appreciates the time and effort taken to respond to this survey. The U.S. Government acknowledges its obligations under 18 U.S.C. §1905 to protect information qualifying as “confidential” under this statute. [To avoid possible confusion with the meaning of the term “confidential” in the context of Classified Information,” we will use the term “PROPRIETARY.”] Pursuant to this statute, the U.S. Government is willing to accept any trade secret or PROPRIETARY restrictions placed on qualifying data forwarded in response to the survey questions and to protect it from unauthorized disclosure subject to the following: 1. Clearly and conspicuously mark qualifying data with the restrictive legend (all caps) “PROPRIETARY” with any explanatory text, so that the U.S. Government is clearly notified of what data needs to be appropriately protected. 2. In marking such data, please take care to mark only those portions of the data or materials that are truly confidential (over breadth in marking inappropriate data as “PROPRIETARY” may diminish or eliminate the usefulness of your response - see item 6 below). Use circling, underscoring, highlighting or any other appropriate means to indicate those portions of a single page which are to be protected. 3. The U.S. Government is not obligated to protect unmarked data. Additionally, marked data that is already in the public domain or in the possession of the U.S. Government or third parties, or is afterward placed into the public domain by the owner or another party through no fault of the U.S. Government will not be protected once in the public domain. Data already in the possession of the U.S. Government will be protected in accordance with the U.S. Government's rights in the data. 4. Confidential data transmitted electronically, whether by physical media or not, whether by the respondent or by the U.S. Government, shall contain the “PROPRIETARY” legend, with any explanatory text, on both the cover of the transmittal e-mail and at the beginning of the file itself. Where appropriate for only portions of an electronic file, use the restrictive legends ‘PROPRIETARY PORTION BEGINS:” and “PROPRIETARY PORTION ENDS.” 5. In any reproductions of technical data or any portions thereof subject to asserted restrictions, the U.S. Government shall also reproduce the asserted restriction legend and any explanatory text. 6. The U.S. Government sometimes uses support contractors in evaluating responses. Consequently, responses that contain confidential information may receive only limited or no consideration since the Respondent’s marking of data as “PROPRIETARY” will preclude disclosure of same outside the U.S. Government and therefore will preclude disclosure to these support contractors assisting the evaluation effort. The U.S. Government will use its best efforts to evaluate those responses that contain confidential information without using support contractors consistent with the resources available.