Aggregate Level Simulation Protocol: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Dexbot (talk | contribs)
m Bot: Deprecating Template:Cite doi and some minor fixes
Line 29:
==Basic Tenets==
 
* ''Data management.'' The schemes for internal state representation differ among existing simulations, necessitating a common representational system and concomitant mapping and control mechanisms.
DARPA sponsored the design of a general interface between large, existing, aggregate-level combat simulations. Aggregate-level combat simulations use [[Lanchester's laws|Lanchestrian]] models of combat rather than individual physical weapon models and are typically used for high-level training. Despite representational differences, several principles of SIMNET applied to aggregate-level simulations:
 
* Architecture independence. Architectural characteristics (implementation language, user interface, and time flow mechanism) of existing simulations differed. The architecture implied by ALSP must be unobtrusive to existing architectures.
* ''Dynamic configurability.'' Simulations may join and depart an exercise without restriction.
* ''Geographic distribution.'' Simulations can reside in different geographic locations yet exercise over the same logical terrain.
* ''Autonomous entities.'' Each simulation controls its own resources, fires its own weapons and, when one of its objects is hit, conducts damage assessment locally.
* ''Communication by message passing.'' A simulation uses a message-passing protocol distribute information to all other simulations.
 
The ALSP challenge had requirements beyond those of SIMNET:
* ''Simulation time management.'' Typically, simulation time is independent of wall-clock time. For the results of a distributed simulation to be "correct," time must be consistent across all simulations.<ref name="lamport">Lamport, L. (1978). "Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System," ''Communications of the ACM,'' 21(7), pp. 558-565, July.</ref>
* ''Data management.'' The schemes for internal state representation differ among existing simulations, necessitating a common representational system and concomitant mapping and control mechanisms.
* Architecture independence. Architectural characteristics (implementation language, user interface, and time flow mechanism) of existing simulations differed. The architecture implied by ALSP must be unobtrusive to existing architectures.
 
==Conceptual Framework==