ACT's Vision & Objectives for Employment & Integration through Modelling & Simulation, Lecture notes of Technology

Download ACT's Vision & Objectives for Employment & Integration through Modelling & Simulation and more Lecture notes Technology in PDF only on Docsity! Allied Command Transformation Modelling & Simulation Vision December 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 1 – INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1.3 BENEFITS OF M&S FOR THE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 1.4 BENEFITS OF M&S FOR THE CAPABILITY DOMAINS 1.5 COMMON VS. SPECIFIC M&S SUPPORT TO APPLICATION AREAS 1.6 M&S STAKEHOLDERS 5 - 10 5 - 6 6 6 - 7 7 - 8 9 9 - 10 2 – ACT VISION REGARDING MODELLING AND SIMULATION 2.1 ACT M&S VISION 2.2 M&S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2.2.1 M&S Goals 2.2.2 M&S Objectives 2.3 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE VISION 2.3.1 Resources 2.3.2 Organization 11 - 14 11 11 - 12 11 12 13 - 14 13 14 ANNEX I – NATO M&S VISION AND OBJECTIVES 15 - 17 ANNEX II – M&S REQUIREMENTS. CURRENT M&S SUPPORT AND SHORTFALLS 18 - 20 ANNEX III – EXAMPLES OF M&S POTENTIAL SUPPORT TO CURRENT ACT INITIATIVES 21 ANNEX IV – ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY OF MODELLING AND SIMULATION TERMINOLOGY 22 - 27 ANNEX V – REFERENCES 28 2 of 28 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND The continuously challenging Alliance strategic environment, coupled with the changing nature and increased complexity of operations, demand a fresh approach to preparing for and executing NATO activities. In order to improve the military effectiveness of the Alliance to address these emerging challenges the Allied Command Transformation (ACT) has the mission to lead transformation of NATO military structures, capabilities, and doctrines. In this respect, ACT pursues a transformational model where concept development and experimentation, research and technology, and interoperability combine to promote and support the development of capabilities. Modelling and Simulation (M&S)1 has tremendous potential to support the ACT’s mission. M&S is an enabling technology that can enhance training, defence planning and the support to military operations. Furthermore, M&S can assist the capability development process which ACT utilizes as its main tool for transformation. ACT is already making a considerable effort to support training by equipping the Joint Warfare Centre (JWC) and Joint Force Training Centre (JFTC) with appropriate M&S assets required to perform their missions. There are also existing plans, under the Snow Leopard program, and with the support of NC3A, NATO M&S Group (NMSG) and other stakeholders, for future synergetic and collaborative provision and utilization of M&S across NATO and the national M&S centres involving a variety of constructive models, virtual simulators and live participants using application purposed systems. Additionally, the NURC develops and uses M&S extensively to support their research activities. In spite of these achievements, ACT’s initiatives to provide M&S support to capability development, defence planning and operations have been limited due to a lack of defined requirements, an analysis of needed capabilities, and available resources. Moreover, ACT currently lacks a common strategy, vision, and governance plan for how to use M&S in support of NATO transformation. The NATO M&S Master Plan (NMSMP), approved by the NATO Secretary General in 1998, well before the existence of ACT, is the capstone implementation guide for NATO in the area of M&S and the only available policy document available to ACT to assist in the articulation of its M&S vision. During the past 10 years, the NATO M&S Group, supported by the NATO M&S Coordination Office (MSCO), has been the NATO body responsible for overseeing the implementation of the NMSMP. In this respect, NMSG has coordinated NATO M&S activities through a series of strategy and business plans and has achieved a great number of the NMSMP objectives. However, the NMSMP was conceived before the 1 In the context of this document, M&S is understood as a practice that deals with all activities related to the life cycle of Models and Simulations including research and technology, development, exploitation, management, policy and organization. 5 of 28 structure of the Alliance was renovated during the Prague Summit creating SACT with a dramatic change of mission from that of its operational predecessor SACLANT. Therefore, as the existing documents do not recognize ACT, its missions, or subordinate organizations it is incumbent upon ACT to develop and promulgate its own M&S Vision, which, while supporting the goals of NATO M&S, also recognizes the unique requirements and challenges facing ACT. 1.2 PURPOSE and SCOPE The purpose of this document is: - To establish the ACT M&S Vision and the associated goals and objectives; - To recognize the support that M&S can provide to the ACT application areas; - To identify the M&S stakeholders, both internal to and external from ACT; - To set the guiding principles for the implementation of this M&S vision. The scope of this document is the ACT’s vision for M&S over the next five years. Following this document, an M&S Roadmap will be produced to identify M&S requirements, capabilities, gaps and priorities. The Roadmap will then specify which M&S activities ACT will perform during this period to achieve the objectives of the Vision. A phased approach will be applied to determine the timelines for the selected activities in accordance with the established priorities of ACT. However, in recognition of the evolving missions of ACT and the rapidly changing technology of M&S, mid-course corrections to this plan are to be expected. Furthermore, this Vision should stimulate a process of continual improvement to guide actions and decisions regarding the governance, development and employment of M&S across ACT. The following paragraphs describe the support M&S can provide to the application areas and identifies the various M&S stakeholders. Part 2 of this document contains the ACT M&S vision, goals and objectives and provides considerations regarding governance, prioritization and resourcing required for the implementation of the Vision. Annexes I to V are provided as supporting documents which should be considered when evaluating the M&S Vision. 1.3 BENEFITS OF M&S FOR THE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ACT has responsibility to support the first five phases of the capability development process (See Figure 1.1) and M&S can enable all of them to some extent. The use of M&S for capability development and experimentation is not new. Before computers and networking technologies, analysts mathematically modelled the effect that new or improved defence systems would have on warfighting capability, engineers built physical models of systems, testers simulated combat in field tests and exercises, and wargames moved models across simulated battlefields. 6 of 28 Specifically, ACT can use M&S to support analysis, experimentation, and test and evaluation by enabling sponsors to better understand capability requirements and identify and evaluate capability solutions. The employment of battle space laboratories (battlelabs), equipped with M&S assets, to support these activities has proven to be very useful and the potential to increase their value to ACT is significant. Figure 1.1 – ACT M&S Support to Capability Development Process 1.4 BENEFITS OF M&S FOR THE CAPABILITY DOMAINS M&S can benefit the capability domains of defence planning, training and operations in which ACT is involved and has an important role to play within NATO and ACT as evidenced by the following: Defence Planning ensures that operational commanders have access to capabilities required to initiate, sustain, and successfully conclude NATO operations. Every aspect of defence planning (force, armament, resource, logistic, C2, civil emergency, etc.) can benefit from the use of M&S. For example, M&S can: - Enable better assessment of the effectiveness of the available forces by taking into account their readiness and core capabilities; - Support the evaluation of the impact of new concepts, systems and technologies without actually absorbing the cost of testing them in the field; - Assist the planners in optimizing the allocation and use of the available assets. Training includes collective training, individual education, exercises and mission related training. Employing M&S through various distributed training architectures (e.g., the proposed NATO Live, Virtual and Constructive - NLVC) the trainees are exposed to processes and equipment that they normally encounter during a real situation. This “safe”, adaptive and immersive training environment enables the audience to gain knowledge and proficiency on Techniques, Tactics and Procedures (TTPs), decision- making, information management, concepts, doctrine and the use of systems. As NATO trains operational and tactical NATO headquarters, M&S enhances the ability to federate with National M&S capabilities, thus facilitating NATO/National Identify Capability Needs Derive Requirements Gap Analysis Identify Possible Solutions Implementation Analysis of Strategic Environment ACT M&S SUPPORT 7 of 28 Support & Coordination HQ SACT NATO School JALLC JFTC JFCs SHAPE CCsNURC JWC NRF ISAF Consultation M & S Requirements Figure 1.3 – M&S Stakeholders from ACT perspective The diagram in figure 1.3 provides a simple and preliminary portrait of the NATO M&S stakeholders. For the point of view of ACT, these have been divided in three groups: those who provide M&S requirements and include the Strategic Commands; those who provide support and coordination such as NC3A, NCSA or NURC; and, finally, those who provide advice like nations, NMSG or COEs. Some stakeholders could perform more than one role. Also, there could be other stakeholders not included in this picture and they will be indentified based on future developments. Due to the large number of M&S stakeholders involved, their diversity, the complex relationships among them, and the fact that the NMSMP has not been updated since 1998, NATO has to establish a new and more robust M&S business model. Accordingly, ACT has to revise its internal M&S business model. Initially, the NATO M&S stakeholders established the baseline-requirements which were subsequently translated into M&S high-level requirements and then used by ACT to derive this M&S vision. (See Annex II for a snapshot of M&S requirements). 10 of 28 2. ACT VISION REGARDING MODELLING AND SIMULATION 2.1 ACT M&S VISION ACT exploits modelling and simulation to enable NATO transformation wherever it can enhance capability, increase interoperability, save resources or reduce risk in the ACT application areas of training, support to operations, defence planning and capability development. 2.2 M&S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2.2.1 M&S Goals The goals that ACT expects to achieve using M&S are: Enhance Capability. ACT is heavily involved in the first five steps of the capability development process (Figure 1.1) from understanding the future strategic environment to identifying and assessing possible solutions. M&S can enable the development of new training, operations support, and defence planning capabilities by facilitating the evaluation of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership development, personnel, facilities and interoperability (DOTMLPFI) issues. Increase interoperability. Interoperability in NATO is the ability to operate together. M&S can be used to increase NATO interoperability at all levels (force, HQs, organizations, systems, etc) by supporting, for example, training, education, exercises, mission rehearsal, test and evaluation, CD&E or certification. In particular, M&S can be used to improve interoperability in multinational operations by distributed, networked utilization of NATO and national M&S centres and systems. Save Resources. Resources can be material, fiscal or labour. For example, the use of M&S to examine and/or validate possible solutions offers an alternative approach from the traditional costly test and evaluation methodology. Also, military forces and resources are limited and M&S can be used to provide synthetic environments to compare options and courses of action enabling more efficient and cost-effective defence planning and operational performance. Finally, M&S solutions based on distributed, networked use of NATO and national assets will assist in accomplishing this goal. Reduce Risk. There are many categories of risk, some of them being risk to human life or material. For instance, in military training, experimentation, and operations there is inherent risk due to the dangerous nature of the environment. M&S may substantially reduce risk by providing a safe synthetic environment in which all or part of the event is conducted. M&S can also provide tools for analysis to foster a more complete understanding and appreciation of both military and non-military aspects of an operational situation, thereby helping commanders make more informed decisions by offering comparisons of alternative courses of action thus reducing risk or saving resources. 11 of 28 These goals can be interrelated. For example, when enhancing capability, risk may be reduced as well. Also, these goals provide criteria to test if ACT decisions on the use of M&S are in accordance with this vision. 2.2.2 M&S Technical Development Objectives To successfully attain the NATO M&S goals ACT must determine its role and responsibilities with regard to the five primary objectives of the NMSMP (See Annex I) and it will coordinate with NMSG on their achievement. The five objectives are: - Pursue a Common Technical Framework to Foster Interoperability and Reuse; - Provide Common Services to Increase Cost-Effectiveness in NATO M&S activities; - Develop Federations/Simulations; - Employ Simulations to Enhance NATO Mission Effectiveness; - Incorporate Technological Advances. In addition, ACT pursues the following particular objectives: - Support the NATO M&S Policy. For example, support the update of the NATO M&S Master Plan, and ensure that NATO military requirements (e.g., technical, operational, training, etc.) are used to influence the NATO M&S Policy; - Collaborate with NATO and partner nations, NATO Modelling and Simulation Group (NMSG), other NATO bodies, Centres of Excellence (COEs), international organizations, industry, and academia to build a strong NATO M&S Business Model; - Improve the current ACT M&S Business Model; - Contribute as fully as possible to the ongoing work of international M&S community. Achieving these objectives will ensure more effective employment of M&S, raise significantly the profile of M&S in ACT and foster a coherent integration of this technology within the overall ACT and NATO business model. However, in recognition of the limited M&S resources, ACT must insure that any and all M&S technical development is only supported if it can be determined that it will increase ACT M&S capability to satisfy the ACT requirements. 12 of 28 ANNEX I EXTRACT FROM THE NATO M&S MASTER PLAN3 NATO MODELLING & SIMULATION VISION AND OBJECTIVES NATO M&S VISION The NATO M&S vision is to provide a readily available, flexible and cost-effective means to enhance NATO operations in the application areas of defence planning, education, training, exercises, support to operations, research, technology development and armaments acquisition. This will be achieved by a NATO-wide co-operative effort that promotes interoperability, reuse and affordability. NATO MODELLING & SIMULATION OBJECTIVES Objective I - Establish a Common Technical Framework to Foster Interoperability and Reuse. This objective establishes a common (open standard) technical framework (CTF) to promote the interoperability and reuse of models and simulations across the Alliance. The technical framework consists of a common technical architecture and data standards that promote common understanding of data across models, simulations and live systems, (e.g., Communication and Information Systems (CIS), weapon systems on instrumented ranges, hardware-in-the-loop, etc.). Sub-objective 1.1 - Adopt the High Level Architecture (HLA) as the NATO standard technical architecture for simulation applications; Sub-objective 1.2 - Establish recommended data interchange standards for M&S applications. Objective II - Provide Common Services to Increase Cost-Effectiveness in NATO M&S Activities. The objective of providing common services is to improve the cost-effectiveness of NATO M&S activities by satisfying common requirements by a common means. To meet NATO requirements, to discourage unnecessary duplication of effort and to encourage maximum efficiency in the use of NATO resources rather than develop new capabilities, the Alliance should leverage existing NATO and national capabilities and pursue the cooperative provision of common services. Sub-objective 2.1 - Compile and synthesize widely required M&S information, to include lessons-learned, impact assessments and recommended practices for critical processes such as federation development, verification, validation and accreditation (VV&A) practices, etc. Sub-objective 2.2 - Provide M&S-related education to the NATO community. Sub-objective 2.3 - Promote the sharing of M&S resources through a simulation resource library (SRL). 3 This literal extract from the NATO M&S master plan is provided to facilitate the reading of the document. 15 of 28 Sub-objective 2.4 - Establish a help desk to facilitate the development and use of M&S. Objective III - Develop Simulations NATO must maximize the cost-effectiveness of simulated mission space development by reusing and federating existing capabilities whenever practical. In many cases, cost-effective solutions to Alliance requirements may be found in the evolution (modification) of existing simulations. Whenever practical, new development projects should be cooperative in nature. Simulated mission spaces for NATO’s diverse requirements may also be developed by pooling resources to build a single application or by cooperatively developing a multi-organization and/or multinational federation. Sub-objective 3.1 - Identify and prioritize M&S requirements. Sub-objective 3.2 - Identify the most cost-effective strategies to satisfy each simulation requirement, with a preference for reuse, federation of existing capabilities and co-operative development. Sub-objective 3.3 - Allocate resources to satisfy the highest priority simulation requirements. Sub-objective 3.4 - Execute the selected and resourced development strategy. Sub-objective 3.5 - Provide information to the larger NATO community regarding the resultant simulations and any lessons-learned during development. Objective IV - Employ Simulations to Enhance NATO Mission Effectiveness Employing simulations that effectively allow the Alliance to realize its M&S goal will substantially enhance NATO operations in the principal application areas. To maximize the effective employment of simulations, NATO must address planning, resourcing, database preparation, operating and assessment issues. Sub-objective 4.1 - Plan employment. Note: The class of actions to be considered should include: scenario definition, security provisions, phase-out of old simulations, federation development, communication provisions, equipment maintenance, training audience indoctrination, database preparation, initialization, simulation exercise control/management, data collection, after action review and post-exercise documentation. Sub-objective 4.2 - Provide resources to operate simulations. Sub-objective 4.3 - Provide databases. Sub-objective 4.4 - Operate simulations to improve all aspects of NATO operations, including armaments acquisition. 16 of 28 17 of 28 Sub-objective 4.5 - Conduct impact assessments and document lessons-learned to guide further development/investments. Objective V - Incorporate Technological Advances M&S-related technology advances are expected to occur frequently and will provide opportunities to increase functional capabilities, performance and overall M&S effectiveness. To assist M&S users in maintaining awareness of such M&S-related technology developments, NATO needs a process to monitor technology developments by others and to conduct its own technology-development activities in key areas not addressed elsewhere. Sub-objective 5.1 - Monitor M&S-related technological advances. Sub-objective 5.2 - Conduct research and development, experiments and pilot projects, as needed, to support Alliance requirements. Sub-objective 5.3 - Share information on realized advances to facilitate incorporation. Sub-objective 5.4 - Implement technological advances. As a general shortfall, across all application areas, the lack of common data formats, repositories, policy and organization means to allow for data sharing (including scenarios) is considered by many the biggest obstacle to achieve M&S interoperability. 20 of 28 21 of 28 ANNEX III EXAMPLES OF M&S POTENTIAL SUPPORT TO CURRENT ACT INITIATIVES To better illustrate the benefits of M&S to the application areas this annex provides examples of potential M&S support to some ongoing ACT initiatives (IPTs, ICTs and WGs). The list of examples provided here is not inclusive or exclusive of all ACT initiatives. CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT TRAINING OPERATIONS DEFENCE PLANNING Information Superiority & NATO Network Enabled Capability (NNEC) Provide analysis support to ongoing development of the concept including comparison and evaluation of possible solutions Provide capability to train in situ on real systems. Provide support to the utilization of NNEC and various knowledge development and decision enabling tools Evaluation of new capabilities for NNEC Maritime Situational Awareness (MSA) Test and evaluation of algorithms for anomalous track detection. Visualize expected results. Train in new processes M&S could be part of the decision support tool to identify anomalous tracks Counter Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED) Test and evaluation of future capabilities and Techniques Tactics and Procedures (TTPs) Training on TTPs Mission rehearsal and planning. Evaluation of anomalous traffic patters based in surveillance data (satellite or UAVs) NATO Response Forces (NRF) Investigate further integration efforts to allow more effective training solutions. Certification of NRF Assist in the preparation effort for Joint training opportunities Tool for planning and execution of operation, including mission rehearsal Provide the analysis needed to capture lessons learned Friendly Force Tracking (FFT) Explore future uses and analysis of those capabilities Test and evaluation on FFT solutions Training on TTPs Tools to perform FFT during operations Provide assessment of system capabilities to perform in non- traditional combatant situations Snow Leopard (SL) Advise on the implementation and interoperability of federates Enhance training and aid interoperability of the federates Provide the analysis needed to capture lessons learned ANNEX IV ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY OF MODELLING AND SIMULATION TERMINOLOGY PART I ACRONYMS / GLOSSARY ACO Allied Command Operations ACT Allied Command Transformation Bi-SC Bi-Strategic Command (ACO & ACT) CAX Computer Assisted Exercise – A means of using computer simulations and models in support of exercises C2 Command and Control C4I Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence CD&E Concept Development and Experimentation (Evaluation) CGF Computer-Generated Forces C-IED Counter Improvised Explosive Device CIS Communication and Information System CNAD Conference of National Armaments Directors COE Centre of Excellence COTS Commercial Off-the-Shelf CP Capability Package DIS Distributed Interactive Simulation DOTMLPFI Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Development, Personnel, Facilities and Interoperability EBAO Effects Based Approach to Operations EPOW Experimental Programme of Work FCRT Future Capabilities, Research and Technology FFT Friendly Force Tracking FOC Final Operational Capability FOGO Flag or General Officer FOM Federation Object Model HLA High Level Architecture HQ Headquarters ICT Integrated Capability Team IOC Initial Operational Capability IPT Integrated Project Team IS International Staff JAALC Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Centre JCATS Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation JEEA Joint Experimentation, Exercises and Assessment JET Joint Education and Training JFCs Joint Force Commands JFCOM Joint Forces Command JFTC Joint Force Training Centre JJJ JALLC, JWC, JFTC 22 of 28 Federate. A member of an HLA federation. All applications participating in a federation are called federates. In reality, these applications may include simulations, federate managers, data collectors, live systems, or passive viewers. Federation. A set of interacting simulations, real-world (“live”) systems (e.g., Communication and Information Systems - CIS), weapon system hardware, instrumented ranges) and utilities (e.g., federation managers, data collectors, passive viewers), collectively termed “federates,” which together provide users with a simulated mission space in which they can accomplish their objective. High Level Architecture federations interact over a Runtime Infrastructure (RTI) in accordance with a Federation Object Model (FOM). Federation Object Model (FOM). An identification of the essential classes of objects, object attributes and object interactions that are supported by an HLA federation. In addition, optional classes of additional information may also be specified to achieve a more complete description of the federation structure and/or behaviour. Fidelity. The accuracy of the representation when compared to the real world. High Level Architecture (HLA). The High Level Architecture is composed of three parts: the HLA Rules, the HLA Interface Specification, and the Object Model Template (OMT). The HLA Rules describe the general principles defining the HLA, and delineate ten basic rules that apply to HLA federations and federates. The HLA Interface Specification defines the functional interface between federates and the Runtime Infrastructure (RTI). The Object Model Template Specification provides a specification for documenting key information about simulations and federations. Use of the OMT to describe Simulation and Federation Object Models (SOMs and FOMs) is a key part of the HLA. Live, Virtual and Constructive Simulation. The categorisation of simulations into live, virtual and constructive is problematic because there is no clear division between these categories. The degree of human participation in the simulation is infinitely variable, as is the degree of equipment realism. This categorisation also suffers by excluding a category for simulated people working real equipment (e.g., robotics). a. Live Simulation. A simulation involving real people operating real systems. b. Virtual Simulation. A simulation involving real people operating simulated systems. Virtual simulations inject human-in-the-loop (HITL) in a central role by exercising motor control skills (e.g., flying an airplane), decision skills (e.g., committing fire control resources to action), or communication skills (e.g., as members of a CIS team). 25 of 28 c. Constructive Model or Simulation. Models and simulations that involve simulated people operating simulated systems. Real people stimulate (make inputs) to such simulations but are not involved in determining the outcomes. Model. A representation of a system, entity, phenomenon, or process. Software models of specific entities are comprised of algorithms and data. M&S Reuse. The use of M&S resources, (e.g., models, simulations, databases, algorithms, tools) for purposes beyond those for which they were originally developed. Reuse can occur within an organization or in different organizations, or in different application areas. Object Model. A specification of the objects intrinsic to a given system, including a description of the object characteristics (attributes) and a description of the static and dynamic relationships that exist between objects. Real-World. The set of real or hypothetical causes and effects that simulation technology attempts to replicate. When used in a military context, the term is synonymous with real battlefield to include air, land and sea combat. Representation. The portrayal of an entity or process provided by a model, simulation, or federation. Representational Resource. Knowledge about the real world (raw materials) used to develop a model, simulation, or federation. Representational resources fall into one of three categories: d. Functional Description of the Mission Space (FDMS). An operator’s view of the entities, actions, relationships, interactions and environmental factors associated with a mission. Mission spaces may include any aspect of the real world, to include military operations, medical treatment, manufacturing, electrical power distribution, etc. e. Characteristics and Performance Descriptions (C&PD). An expert’s identification of the entity’s nature, which are comprised of (1) attribute definitions, (2) algorithms and (3 ) data limits. f. Scenario-specific Data. The particular information used by a given model, simulation or federation execution so that it may provide its representations in the context of a set of real-world circumstances. Scenario-specific data include terrain databases, order of battle, weather, plans and other state data. 26 of 28 Resolution. The level of detail of a model or simulation. Runtime Infrastructure (RTI). The general purpose distributed operating system software that provides the common interface services during the runtime of an HLA federation. Scalability. The ability of a distributed simulation to maintain time and spatial consistency as the number of entities and accompanying interactions increase. Scenario. (1) Description of an exercise (“initial conditions” in military terms). It is part of the session database that configures the units and platforms and places them in specific locations with specific missions. (2) An initial set of conditions and time line of significant events imposed on trainees or systems to achieve exercise objectives. Simulation. The execution over time of models representing the attributes of one or more entities or processes. Human-in-the-Loop simulations, also known as simulators, are a special class of simulations. Simulation Object Model (SOM). A specification of the intrinsic capabilities that an individual simulation offers to federations. The standard format in which SOMs are expressed provides a means for federation developers to determine quickly the suitability of simulation systems to assume specific roles within a federation. Validation. The process of determining the degree to which a model or simulation is an accurate representation of the real-world from the perspective of the intended uses of the model or simulation. Verification. The process of determining that a model or simulation implementation accurately represents the developer’s conceptual description and specification. Verification also evaluates the extent to which the model or simulation has been developed using sound and established software engineering techniques. Verification, Validation & Certification (VV&C). The process of verifying the internal consistency and correctness of data, validating that it represents real world entities appropriate for its intended purpose or an expected range of purposes, and certifying it as having a specified level of quality or as being appropriate for a specified use, type of use, or range of uses. The process has two perspectives: producer and user process. 27 of 28