Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Benchmarking framework for command and control mission planning under uncertain environment

  • Focus
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the core of the military information system, the command and control (C2) mission planning suffers from the high complexity, environmental uncertainty. To address this problem, many studies highlight the agility and resilience of C2-organizations and propose many solutions. However, there is no benchmark to compare these models and methods. In order to understand such organization’s dynamic and emergence behaviors, this paper presents a benchmark framework of C2 decision-making under uncertainty environment. This is a basic case on multi-force joint operation. We present an optimization model and a horizon partition algorithm aimed to plan an optimal organizational structure with higher operational flexibility, low cost and high performance. Finally, we explore the main traditional models on the benchmark case. The result shows the proposed model is competitive under uncertain environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdelsalam HM (2003) Optimization-based architecture for managing complex integrated product development project. Ph.D. dissertation, USA: Old Dominion University

  • Akellaa MR, Battaa R, Sudit M et al (2008) Cellular network configuration with co-channel and adjacent-channel interference constraints. Comput Oper Res 35:3738–3757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alberts DS, Hayes RE (2003) Power to the edge: command control in the information age. United States: command and control research program publications, 2003

  • Barr J, Nobuyuki H (2008) Organizations undertaking complex projects in uncertain environments. J Econ Interact Coord 3(2):119–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield ML, Pearlman JS et al (2008) A system-of-systems engineering GEOSS: architectural approach. IEEE Syst J 2(3):321–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM (1995) Computational and mathematical organization theory: perspective and directions. Comput Math Organ Theory 1(1):39–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM, Krackhardt D (1999) A typology for C2 measures. In: Proceedings of the 1999 international symposium on command and control research and technology, Newport, RI. Vienna, VA

  • Carley KM, Lin Z (1995) Organizational designs suited to high performance under stress. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 25(1):221–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM, Prietula MJ (1994) Computational organization theory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM, Svoboda DM (1996) Modeling organizational adaptation as a simulated annealing process. Sociol Methods Res 25(1):138–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen G, Sun P, Zhang J, Wu J (2018) Adaptive adjustment of command and control structure based on discrete firefly algorithm. Comput Eng Appl Issue 15:112–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuma H (2006) Increasing complexity and limits of organization in the microlithography industry: implications for Japanese science-based industries. Res Policy 35:393–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemple WG, Kleinman DL, Berigan MC (1996) A2C2 initial experiment: adaptation of the joint scenario and formalization. In: Proceedings of the 1996 command & control research & technology symposium, Monterey, CA, pp 837–846

  • Kleinman DL, Levchuk GM, Hutchins SG et al (2003) Scenario design for the empirical testing of organizational congruence. In: International command and control research and technology symposium, Washington, DC

  • Krackhardt D, Carley KM (1998) A PCANS model of structure in organization. In: Proceedings of the 1998 international symposium on command and control research and technology, pp 113–119

  • Levchuk GM, Levchuk YN, Luo J, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2002a) Normative design of organizations i: mission planning. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 32(3):346–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levchuk GM, Levchuk YN, Luo J, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2002b) Normative design of organizations ii: organizational structure. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 32(3):360–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levchuk GM, Kleinman DL, Sui R et al (2003) Congruence of human organizations and missions: theory versus data. In: International command and control research and technology symposium, Washington, DC

  • Levchuk GM, Levchuk YN, Luo J, Pattipati KR, Kleinman DL (2004) Normative design of project-based organizations—part III: modeling congruent, robust, and adaptive organizations. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 34(3):337–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin Z (2006) Environmental determination or organizational design: an exploration of organizational decision making under environmental uncertainty. Simul Model Pract Theory 14(4):438–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Z, Yang DS, Wen D, Zhang WM, Mao WJ Cyber-physical-social systems for command and control. IEEE Intell Syst (in press)

  • Meirina C, Levchuk YN, Levchuk GM, Pattipati KR (2008) A Markov decision problem approach to goal attainment. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 38(1):116–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer M, Zaggl MA, Carley KM (2011) Measuring CMOT’s intellectual structure and its development. Comput Math Organ Theory 17(1):1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishraa N, Prakashb MK, Shankar R et al (2005) Hybrid tabu-simulated annealing based approach to solve multi-constraint product mix decision problem. Expert Syst Appl 29:446–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedamallu CS, Ozdamar L (2008) Investigating a hybrid simulated annealing and local search algorithm for constrained optimization. Eur J Oper Res 185:1230–1245

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Qian M, Liu Z, Wang J, Yao L, Zhang WM (2010) Coordination-theoretic approach to modeling grid service composition process. J Syst Eng Electron 21(4):713–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan RG, Wulf J (2006) The flattening firm: evidence from panel data on the changing nature of corporate hierarchies. Rev Econ Stat 88(4):759–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Y, Yao P, Li M, Li F (2016) Adaptive adjusting method of command and control structure of army organization. Syst Eng Electron Technol 38(9):2086–2092

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun P, Wu J, Chen G, Zhang J (2018) Adaptive adjustment of command and control structure based on artificial bee colony algorithm. Comput Appl Res 1060:012055

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas A, Turner T, Soderlund S (2009) Net-centric adapter for legacy systems. IEEE Syst J 3(3):336–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiu BX (2006) Design methodology of C2 organizational structure and its analysis of robustness and adaptively. Ph.D. dissertation, National University of Defense Technology, China

  • Yu F, Tu F, Pattipati KR (2006) A novel congruent organizational design methodology using group technology and a nested genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 36(1):5–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Numbers 71701205 and 71701206.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of System Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, 410073, China

    Yanghe Feng, Wei Shi, Guangquan Cheng, Jincai Huang & Zhong Liu

  2. Center for Assessment and Demonstration Research, Beijing, 100000, China

    Wei Shi

Authors
  1. Yanghe Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wei Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wei Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Guangquan Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jincai Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zhong Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanghe Feng.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Yanghe Feng declares that he has no conflict of interest. Wei Shi declares that he has no conflict of interest. Wei Shi declares that he has no conflict of interest. Guangquan Cheng declares that he has no conflict of interest. Jincai Huang declares that he has no conflict of interest. Zhong Liu declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Communicated by Y. Ni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feng, Y., Shi, W., Shi, W. et al. Benchmarking framework for command and control mission planning under uncertain environment. Soft Comput 24, 2463–2478 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-03732-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-03732-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation