Inactive

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in Government Act of 1976 (U.S.C. 552b, as amended) and 41 Code of the Federal Regulation... SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in Government Act of 1976 (U.S.C. 552b, as amended) and 41 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR 102-3.140 through 160) the Department of the Army requests industry information on products, science and technology (S&T) research, operational concepts, and mission support innovations to support the Army in evaluating its current state of data integrity and in developing recommendations for future consideration. No funds are available for any proposal or information submission and submitting information does not bind the Army for any future contracts/grants resulting from this request for information: (a) The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this solicitation or to otherwise pay for the information solicited. (b) Although “proposal” and “offeror” are used in this Request for Information, your response will be treated as information only. It shall not be used as a proposal. (c) This request for information is issued for the purpose of market research. The Army Science Board is requesting information from organizations external to the Army that will help the Board complete its analysis and ensure that all viable sources of information are explored. Based on information submitted in response to this request, the Army Science Board may subsequently conduct additional market research. To supplement the information developed in previous studies and otherwise available to the Board, organizations are invited to submit information on products or technologies to support on “Army Modeling and Simulation (M&S).” The Army Science Board (ASB) is conducting a FY2020 study on “Army Modeling and Simulation (M&S)”, sponsored by the Secretary of the Army. The purpose of the study is to assess the Army's M&S capabilities in support of strategic decision-making, acquisition, training, and test and evaluation (T&E). Specifically, the study is requested to determine Army M&S needs, assess state-of-the-art (SOTA) capabilities with respect to Army M&S needs and develop recommendations to close any shortfalls. Accordingly, the ASB is soliciting input from industry (traditional defense contractors as well as and non-traditional and/or small businesses), Government laboratories, Federally Funded Research and Development Contractors (FFRDCs) and academia to understand M&S SOTA for applications of interest to the US Army. ADDRESSES: Written responses are to be submitted to the: Army Science Board, ATTN: Designated Federal Officer, 2530 Crystal Drive, Suite 7098, Arlington, VA 22202. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Heather J. Gerard at 703.545.8652 or via heather.j.gerard.civ@mail.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background. The Terms of Reference (ToR) (See attachment) provided by the Office of the Secretary of the Army directs the Army Science Board (ASB) to conduct a study entitled, on “Army Modeling and Simulation (M&S).” The purpose of the study is to assess the Army's M&S capabilities in support of strategic decision making, acquisition, training, and test and evaluation (T&E). Specifically, the study is requested to determine Army M&S needs, assess state-of-the-art (SOTA) capabilities with respect to Army M&S needs and develop recommendations to close any shortfalls. Accordingly, the ASB is soliciting input from industry (traditional defense contractors as well as and non-traditional and/or small businesses), Government laboratories, Federally Funded Research and Development Contractors (FFRDCs) and academia to understand M&S SOTA for applications of interest to the US Army. Army M&S applications include analysis in support of strategic decisions, concept development, requirements definition, systems engineering and integration, acquisition, training and T&E. Army M&S tools must be capable of modeling not just the current environment and warfighting capabilities but also future environments and capabilities. Modeling the future fight and emerging blue/red capabilities is particularly important for analysis tools used to support informed strategic decisions, modernization investment priority decisions and acquisition of new systems. As US Joint forces transition to Multi Domain Operations (MDO), it is vital for M&S tools to be able to model the system-of-systems (soS) convergence of multiple domains operating in a joint context, including space and cyber/electronic warfare (EW). Historically, M&S analysis tools have focused on kinetic effects on the battlefield. M&S tools for analysis of the nascent MDO concept must be capable of modeling important non-kinetic effects as well, such as cyber, EW, communications networking, intelligence, command and control (C2), autonomy and artificial intelligence (AI) enabled capabilities. Additionally, to capture human-in-the-loop impact on the observe-orient-decide-act (OODA) loop, M&S of human behavior and cognitive decision-making and human-system interactions will become increasingly important. The ASB is interested in understanding SOTA across all levels of M&S from detailed physics-based models to force-on-force simulations; and is especially interested in understanding SOTA in the above referenced non-kinetic modeling areas and in SoS analysis/evaluation. The ASB is also particularly interested in commercial and/or non-development products, processes or technologies that might be applicable to meeting Army M&S needs. Submission Instructions and Format: To respond to this request for information, interested parties should submit their packages by 26 February 2020 by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. The ASB is requesting capability descriptions of existing or in-development M&S tools in any of the following areas of interest. The tools may be constructive, virtual, synthetic, live or hybrid live-virtual-constructive (LVC). Respondents may limit the focus of responses to their specialized area(s). For example, if an organization specializes in modeling autonomy or AI, a response to topic #6 below is all that is necessary for the response. 1. System-of-Systems (SoS). Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development to simulate interactions of heterogeneous systems and human-robotic teams within a SoS environment (e.g., MDO). Is the SoS simulation self-contained or does it utilize a distributed federated architecture (e.g., High Level Architecture (HLA)) to remotely access models resident elsewhere to compose a simulation? If the latter, what is your experience in successfully conducting simulation experiments in a federated environment that may have some combination of constructive, virtual or live “federates”? How do you envision a similar capability being used by the Army to evaluate alternative MDO SoS architectures to help identify a near-optimum SoS architecture for its six high-priority modernization systems, i.e., long-range precision fires (LRPF), next-generation combat vehicle (NGCV), future vertical lift (FVL), air and missile defense (A&MD), network and soldier lethality, in conjunction with existing or other systems? What improvements would be required to meet Army needs? How are non-kinetic effects integrated into your SoS? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. 2. Major System Acquisition. Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development that support system acquisition, including both pre-acquisition (pre Milestone B) capability based assessments, analysis of alternatives, concept development and evaluation, and operational capability needs assessment; as well as post MS B system requirements definition; operational effectiveness analysis; systems engineering and integration; and system design, development, verification and validation (V&V) and T&E. Which of these tools are government supplied and validated and which are company developed? For company developed tools, what are the unique features of these models that would (i) be considered as SOTA; and (ii) benefit Army M&S? Which of these are protected organizational intellectual property (IP)? What M&S capabilities do you have for modeling non-kinetic effects? How are these effects incorporated into your system operational effectiveness M&S tools? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. 3. Communication Networks. Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development for evaluating the performance of communications networks, including resistance to EW attacks or cyber intrusion. Which of these tools are government supplied and validated and which are company developed? For company developed tools, what are the unique features of these models that would (i) be considered as SOTA; and (ii) benefit Army M&S? Which of these are protected organizational IP? Have these or will these models be incorporated into higher level force effectiveness models? If so, what approach was used, i.e., direct incorporation or derivation of parametric effects as functions of independent variables? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. 4. Command and Control (C2). Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development for evaluating the performance of Intelligence and C2 systems, including resistance to EW attacks or cyber intrusion and the ability to function seamlessly with other services’ C2 systems in a joint battlespace. How is human decision making incorporated into the C2 models? Which of these tools are government supplied and validated and which are company developed? For company developed tools, what are the unique features of these models that would (i) be considered as SOTA; and (ii) benefit Army M&S? Which of these are protected organizational IP? Have these or will these models be incorporated into higher level force effectiveness models? If so, what approach was used, i.e., direct incorporation or derivation of parametric effects as functions of independent variables? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. 5. Cyber and EW. Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development for evaluating the resilience of Blue systems to Red offensive cyber or EW or the effectiveness of Blue offensive cyber or EW on Red systems. If needed, a classified appendix up to the Secret Collateral level may be submitted. Which of these tools are government supplied and validated and which are company developed? For company developed tools, what are the unique features of these models that would (i) be considered as SOTA; and (ii) benefit Army M&S? Which of these are protected organizational IP? Have these or will these models be incorporated into higher level force effectiveness models? If so, what approach was used, i.e., direct incorporation or derivation of parametric effects as functions of independent variables? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. 6. Autonomy and AI. Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development for evaluating the performance and behavior of autonomous vehicles or AI enabled systems (e.g., C2). How is human-machine interaction (HMI) / human factors (HFs) incorporated into these models? How are non-deterministic behaviors of machine learning (ML) systems modeled? Which of these tools are government supplied and validated and which are company developed? For company developed tools, what are the unique features of these models that would (i) be considered as SOTA; and (ii) benefit Army M&S? Which of these are protected organizational IP? Have these or will these models be incorporated into higher level force effectiveness models? If so, what approach have you used, i.e., direct incorporation or derivation of parametric effects as functions of independent variables? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. 7. Human Behavior and Decision Making. Please describe M&S capabilities in use or development for evaluating the impact of human behavior and decision making (HFs) on the force effectiveness (e.g., determination of suspicious activity, OODA or kill chain timelines). How is the variability of skills, experience and cognitive capabilities within the population modeled? Which of these tools are government supplied and validated and which are company developed? For company developed tools, what are the unique features of these models that would (i) be considered as SOTA; and (ii) benefit Army M&S? Which of these are protected organizational IP? Have these or will these models be incorporated into higher level force effectiveness models? If so, what approach was used, i.e., direct incorporation or derivation of parametric effects as functions of independent variables? Please comment on quality of input data needed vs. available to ensure credible results. Any responses received that are marked “Proprietary” or include any usage restrictions will NOT BE REVIEWED by ASB. Submissions require both a CD and a hard copy of the response. The size of the CD submission will be limited to 20 MB. The hard copy format specifications include 12 point font, single-spaced, single-sided, 8.5 by 11 inches paper, with a 1 inch margin. There is an eight page limit to your submission. All Proposers should review the NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL, (NISPOM), dated February 28, 2006, as it provides the baseline standards for the protection of classified information and prescribes the requirements concerning Contractor Development information under paragraph 4-105. Defense Security Service (DSS) Site for the NISPOM is: http://www.dss.mil/isp/fac_clear/download_nispom.html. Only unclassified white papers/CDs must be mailed to the POC listed (see ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). A listing of respondents and whether or not their submission was utilized will be made available for public inspection upon request. Open deliberation by the full committee is anticipated on or about July 23, 2020 in Irvine, CA.