2015IITSECProgramGuideLoRes
Transcription
2015IITSECProgramGuideLoRes
NATIONAL TRAINING AND SIMULATION ASSOCIATION T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T I/ITSEC INTERSERVICE/INDUSTRY TRAINING, SIMULATION & EDUCATION CONFERENCE F O R G I N G T H E F U T U R E T H R O U G H I N N O V AT I O N ch eck o t e r Be su fron t e h t e in sid rs fo r e v o c k c a n d ba u id e G t e k c o you r P . a n d CD W W W. I I T S E C . O R G u NOVEMBER 30 - DECEMBER 4, 2015 PROGRAM GUIDE u O R L A N D O, F L O R I D A n AGENDA Pre-Conference Agenda Dress Code Conference Agenda Continuing Education Units/Continuous Learning Points Orange County Convention Center Diagram Hyatt Regency Diagram In Memoriam 7 7 8 12 13 14 15 n TUTORIALS Tutorial Grid Tutorial Synopses & Schedule 17 18 n SPECIAL EVENTS Signature Events Floor Events Focus Event Community of Interest International Programs Special Guests 29 39 41 47 50 52 n PAPER SESSIONS Paper Session Grid Papers/Authors Presentation Schedule 53 58 n STEM STEM Workforce Initiative Future Leaders • Students at I/ITSEC America’s Teachers at I/ITSEC • Educators (techPATH) Serious Games Showcase & Challenge STEM Pavilion: Project Based Learning I/ITSEC Scholarships Post I/ITSEC Professional Development Workshops 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 n EXHIBITS Hall Happenings 2015 Exhibitors 77 82 n COMMITTEES Conference Committee • Council of Chairs Program Subcommittees Special Teams 85 86 88 TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S n WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS Conference Welcome 2 Keynote Speakers 3 Conference Leadership 4 Interservice Executives 5 Principals & Advisor6 n CONFERENCE INFORMATION Registration Information • Parking • Dress Code 89 Lodging90 Getting Around 91 Publications & Media 92 Association Sponsors 93 Safety & Security 94 Golf Tournament 95 5K Run 96 n I/ITSEC 2016 I/ITSEC 2016 Save the Date Call for Papers and Tutorials Serious Games Showcase & Challenge 97 98 99 n ABSTRACTS101 T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 1 ELCOME ATTENDEES OF I/ITSEC 2015: WELCOME On behalf of the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps, this year’s Lead Services, our sponsoring organization, the National Training and Simulation Association; the Service Executives and their Principals; and the 250-plus volunteers from the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Industry, and Academia, it is my distinct honor and great pleasure to welcome you to the 2015 Interservice/ Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference. With continuing and emerging threats around the world, our military services and government organizations— both here in the U.S. and abroad—are being asked to do more with less. Now more than ever before, innovative modeling and simulation strategies and technologies can help organizations train in Live, Virtual, and/or Constructive (LVC) environments reducing the time to achieve proficiency and saving significant dollars. This year’s Conference theme, “Forging the Future through Innovation,” underscores this crucial need for new and innovative approaches to how we train. Building on the Conference’s military-focused history, I/ITSEC has emerged as the predominant cross-industry forum, drawing an increasing number of attendees from industries including healthcare, energy, transportation and manufacturing, who are in search of new innovations to change the way people learn and perform, to drive down costs, and increase their ability to compete. The volunteer members of our six subcommittees, the Tutorial Board and the Conference Committee have spent this year finding the best technical papers (150), tutorials (21), educationally-focused special events (12), and a range of special programs including the inaugural Operation Blended Warrior multi-year Special Event which will highlight readiness through LVC activities on the exhibit floor. Other special programs include a Black Swan panel, the Future Leaders Pavilion, Serious Games Showcase & Challenge, and Warfighters Corner wrapping up Friday with our Professional Development Workshops. As a result, I am certain you will find the 2015 Program to be rich, diverse, and highly relevant. All tutorials, papers and professional development workshops, as well as the Fellow Special Event are available for Continuing Education Units (CEU) and Continuous Learning Points (CLP). Be sure to visit the I/ITSEC exhibit hall, which hosts the largest display of training systems capabilities in the world. This year, we also welcome continued growth in the number of international attendees. With nearly 2,000 attendees from over 60 countries expected, we have created even more opportunities for networking to promote dialogue and idea exchange. Finally, I want to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to our dedicated volunteers and their sponsors. Their commitment and support has made I/ITSEC 2015 a reality and ensured this Conference remains the premier professional development event across the globe for the training and simulation professional. As you attend the events and walk the exhibit floor over the next few days, please take a moment to thank the authors and other volunteers who have helped make this program a success. Sincerely, D. David Hutchings 2015 Program Chair 2 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Service Keynote KEYNOTE SPEAKERS Admiral John M. Richardson, USN Chief of Naval Operations Admiral John Richardson graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1982 with a Bachelor of Science in Physics. He holds master’s degrees in electrical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and National Security Strategy from the National War College. At sea, Richardson served on USS Parche (SSN 683), USS George C. Marshall (SSBN 654) and USS Salt Lake City (SSN 716). He commanded USS Honolulu (SSN 718) in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Richardson also served as commodore of Submarine Development Squadron (DEVRON) 12; commander, Submarine Group 8; commander, Submarine Allied Naval Forces South; deputy commander, U.S. 6th Fleet; chief of staff, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and U.S. Naval Forces Africa; commander, Naval Submarine Forces, and director of Naval Reactors. His staff assignments include duty in the attack submarine division on the Chief of Naval Operations staff; naval aide to the President; prospective commanding officer instructor for Commander, Submarine Forces, U.S. Pacific Fleet; assistant deputy director for Regional Operations on the Joint Staff; and director of Strategy and Policy at U.S. Joint Forces Command. Richardson served on teams that have been awarded the Presidential Unit Citation, the Joint Meritorious Unit Award, the Navy Unit Commendation, and the Navy “E” Ribbon. He was awarded the Vice Admiral Stockdale Award for his time in command of USS Honolulu. Industry Keynote Waymon Armstrong Founder and Chief Executive Officer Engineering & Computer Simulations Waymon Armstrong is founder and CEO of Engineering & Computer Simulations, Inc. (ECS). As CEO, Armstrong provides strategic leadership to a growing technology company that employs over 110 simulation professionals, computer programmers, artists, and designers who develop, produce, and operate interactive and immersive advanced learning technologies. Armstrong is a visionary and an implementer of novel learning technologies that change the way we implement the art and science of learning – and the way we conduct training. ECS, headquartered in Orlando, Florida, is a leader in modeling simulation and training industry. The company delivers innovative software and simulations technology and services to both government and commercial markets, and has changed the way our military, first responders, emergency management personnel, and professionals in all business sectors learn and practice their professions. Armstrong led the company as a first adopter of computer game technology for learning. His philosophy of early adoption, and implementation of evolving technology solutions continued as the company invested in mobile and virtual world technologies. From its position as a leading U.S. military solution-provider, to its bold early expansion into the commercial sector, Armstrong’s devotion to excellence in learning technologies sets the company apart as a leader in the simulation industry. ECS is a four time I/ITSEC Serious Games Showcase and Challenge winner. The company has also won National awards including Inc. 500/5000, Deloitte Technology Fast 500, and other pre-eminent accolades in the United States and Canada. In 2010 Armstrong was selected by the Small Business Administration as the National Small Business Person of the Year. Armstrong has called Orlando home for over 40 years. He attended Valencia College and the University of Central Florida. He remains a is strong supporter in the Orlando community, currently serving as the chair of Orange County Mayor Teresa Jacobs’ Modeling and Simulation Blue Ribbon Commission and is the immediate past chair of Orlando Inc. He is a passionate business leader, and can be frequently heard speaking at CEO events and forums such as Rollins College Center for Advanced Entrepreneurship Center, GrowFL, and other events encouraging individual business owners and company growth. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 3 Conference Chairs WELCOME Brent Smith I/ITSEC 2015 Conference Chair David Hutchings I/ITSEC 2015 Program Chair BRENT SMITH is the Vice President and Chief Technology Officer for Engineering & Computer Simulations in Orlando, Florida. As the CTO, Mr. Smith is responsible for the overall design of the company’s next generation of learning technologies which include intelligent systems, virtual environments, modeling & simulation applications, and serious games that improve training efficiency. In this role, he is responsible for the strategy and vision of the company’s portfolio of training and education products. He also coordinates research and development activities across the organization with a focus on modeling & simulation, blended learning, performance assessment, and managing big data. Mr. Smith brings over 20 years’ experience in developing enterprise learning architectures and is a nationally recognized expert in the modeling and simulation (M&S) industry. Mr. Smith has written numerous papers, managed large multi-disciplinary programs, and developed award winning simulation content that has been recognized in numerous publications. Mr. Smith has a long standing association with I/ITSEC. Prior to serving as the 2013 Program Chair, he has been an author, a presenter, and exhibitor, and a technology consultant working to help modernize the conference infrastructure. DAVID HUTCHINGS is the Senior Vice President, Strategic Business Development for Raydon Corporation headquartered in Port Orange, Florida. In this role, his primary responsibility is the planning and execution of the strategic growth plan with primary focus on strategic pursuits, partnerships, and M&A. Mr. Hutchings has over 32 years of comprehensive business development and senior management operations experience in DOD, commercial and other government agencies with a strong focus on custom training and simulation solutions. His experience has included playing a significant role in corporate start-ups, turnarounds, acquisitions, business strategy, marketing initiatives, and establishing strategic business partnerships. He has held senior level management positions in regional and national business development, operations, and sales for Raydon Corporation, Camber Corporation, Teledyne Brown Engineering, Interactive Media Corporation, APEX Technology, Simms Industries, and General Physics Corporations. Mr. Hutchings has served on the NDIA Central Florida Board of Directors since 2003 with his current role as the Vice President of Recognition and Awards. Prior to serving as the I/ITSEC 2015 Program Chair, he served as the I/ITSEC STEM Student Tour Coordinator from 2009 - 2014 as well as other I/ITSEC subcommittees in prior years including the Training, Education, Best Paper and PSMA Subcommittees. He is a member of AUSA, NTSA, and NDIA. He holds a B.S. degree in Business Management/Marketing and has served on the Huntsville, AL BizTech Small Business Incubator Board of Advisors. Mr. Hutchings also served six years in the U.S. Navy’s Submarine Force. Conference Sponsor Following graduation from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, designation as a Naval Aviator and training in the F-14 Tomcat, Admiral Robb deployed nine times across the globe accumulating over 5000 hours and 1000 carrier landings. Following a tour flying Russian fighters in the Nevada desert, he commanded Fighter Squadron Fifty One, Carrier Air Wing Nine, the Navy Fighter Weapons RADM James Robb, School (TOPGUN), and Carrier Strike Group Seven. As a Flag Officer he manUSN (Ret.) President National aged all Naval Aviation Programs (N980) and was the Director of Navy Readiness Training and (N43). Following 9/11, he joined USSimulation CENTCOM as the Director of Plans (J5) Association deploying to the Middle East in support of combat operations. Retiring in 2006, he built a successful small consulting business before joining the National Training and Simulation Association as President in June 2012. 4 Craig R. McKinley, Gen (ret), USAF, became President and CEO, National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) in January 2015. He had previously worked at the Air Force Association (AFA). His final assignment in uniform was Chief, National Guard Bureau, where he also served as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Craig received his commission in 1974 as a distinguished graduate of the ROTC program at Southern Methodist UniverGen Craig R. McKinley, USAF (Ret.) sity (SMU). He has served in numerous assignments in flying and operations; President and Chief Executive command positions at group, wing, sector and field operating agency levels. He was Officer National Defense a command pilot with more than 4,000 hours. He graduated with a bachelor’s deIndustrial gree in business administration from SMU Association in 1974 and his Master’s in management and economics from Webster College in 1979. He completed studies at the National War College, National Defense University, in 1995. 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Col Walter Yates, USMC Program Manager, Marine Corps Systems Command PM Training Systems Navy Service Executive (Lead Service) CAPT WES NAYLOR, USN: The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD) is the Navy’s principal center for modeling, simulation, and training systems technologies. The command provides training solutions and research for a wide spectrum of military programs, including aviation, surface & undersea warfare, and other specialized requirements. CAPT Naylor leads a workforce of more than 1,000 scientists, evaluators, engineers, technicians, logisticians, contracting specialists, and support personnel. A native of McLean, Virginia, CAPT Naylor is a graduate of George Mason University, where he earned his Bachelors of Science degree in Government, and a 2007 graduate of the National War College, where he was awarded a Master’s Degree in National Security Strategies. As a Naval Aviator, CAPT Naylor flew the Navy’s P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft. He also has experience serving in various acquisition and staff positions. CAPT Naylor served as the Executive Officer of NAWCTSD for two years prior to assuming command in June 2014. His awards include the Meritorious Service Medal, Air Medal, Navy Commendation Medal, Navy and the Achievement Medal. Marine Corps Service Executive (Lead Service) Col WALTER YATES, USMC, Program Manager, Training Systems: As the Marine Corps Systems Command Program Manager for Training Systems Col Yates is responsible for managing a workforce of over 150 personnel in the acquisition and sustainment of training systems used throughout the Marine Corps. Col Yates graduated from Texas A&M University in 1990 with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering Technology. He graduated from the Naval Postgraduate School in 2004 with a M.S. in the field of Modeling, Virtual Environments and Simulation. As a Field Artillery officer he served ashore and deployed afloat in billets including forward observer, platoon commander, fire direction officer, and battery commander. Col Yates served as the officer in charge of the Battle Simulation Center for MAGTF Training Command from 2004 to 2007. Col Dan Marticello, USAF Chief, Simulators Division, Air Force Materiel Command MG Jon Maddux, USA U.S. Army Program Executive Officer for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation From 2007 to 2011, he served on the Program Manager for Training Systems staff, including a year as the Marine Corps Systems Command Liaison Officer to the Command Element of Multinational Force-West, Iraq. In 2011, Col Yates returned to Marine Corps Systems Command, as the Deputy for Modeling and Simulation. He completed his assignment as a Secretary of Defense Corporate Fellow at Norfolk Southern Corporation prior to reporting for duty as PM TRASYS. Air Force Service Executive Col DAN MARTICELLO, USAF, is Chief of the Simulators Division, AF Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. He directs 400 employees in the acquisition and sustainment of more than 40 USAF and 10 foreign AF training systems. Col Marticello graduated from the USAF Academy and earned an M.S. degree at the University of Colorado. He graduated from USAF Test Pilot School, and Air Command and Staff College. His assignments have included serving as flight test program manager for the F-15 Joint Helmet-mounted Cueing System and AIM-9X missile; overseeing F-117A developmental flight test; working on the HQ AFMC Commander’s Action Group; managing upgrades to the F-15C/D air superiority fleet; and commanding a squadron executing classified acquisition programs. He attended MIT as an AF Fellow, and then managed a C-17 capability upgrade program. He deployed with NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan, where as Chief of Plans and Operations (DCGS), he created the Afghan Defense Acquisition & Resource Management Institute. He was then assigned as Chief of the HQ AFMC Capabilities and Requirements Division, managing the AF Agile Combat Support Core Function portfolio. Army Service Executive MG JON MADDUX, USA, is responsible for simulation, training and test/instrumentation to support the U.S. Army. PEO STRI annually executes a multi-billion dollar program with a workforce of 1200 employees. He oversees approximately 1600 contracts valued at over $28 billion. MG Maddux has held key positions in the Army, including Assistant to the Princi- T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T EXECUTIVES CAPT Wes Naylor, USN Commanding Officer, Naval Air Warfare Center, Training Systems Division Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) pal Military Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the Army Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)); Deputy Commanding General, Support, Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan; PEO Ammunition/Commanding General, Picatinny Arsenal; Chief of Staff, Office of the ASA(ALT); Director for Army Evaluation Task Force Integration, Directorate for Program Manager for Future Combat Systems (Brigade Combat Team); and Project Manager for Future Combat Systems Network Systems Integration. MG Maddux entered the Army as an enlisted Soldier in 1976 and he has earned several awards, including four Legion of Merit awards and the Bronze Star Medal. MG Maddux graduated from the U.S. Army War College and has three Masters degrees. Senior Advisor for Readiness and Training FRANK C. DIGIOVANNI, SES, serves as the Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness). His responsibilities include policy and oversight of military training readiness and capability modernization. He leads the Department’s $4.3B Combatant Commander Exercise and Engagement and Training Transformation, the sustainment of military training ranges, the development of Live, Virtual and Constructive Training Standards and Architectures, the Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative, the creation of a “virtual world” training capability, and ensures training is properly incorporated into major acquisition programs. He also serves as a senior DoD training member on the Modeling and Simulation Steering Committee and collaborates with interagency partners to develop training strategy and policy to ensure Government civilians and Service members are better prepared to conduct reconstruction and stabilization operations. He oversees efforts and policies associated with sustaining access to DoD’s land, air and sea training space and for developing policy, strategic communication and the research agenda associated with energy infrastructure and its impact on the ability of the Department to conduct readiness training activities. 5 Service Principals PRINCIPALS & ADVISOR Diana Teel Navy Industry Outreach, Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD) Martin Bushika Marine Corps Director, Strategic Business Operations, PM TRASYS MARCORSYSCOM Tony DalSasso Air Force Chief Engineer, Simulators Division, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) Traci Jones Army Deputy Chief of Staff, U.S. Army Program Executive Office, Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) OSD Principal Education and Training Advisor Sae Schatz, Ph.D. Director, Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) 6 VADM Al Harms, USN (Ret.) Vice President (Emeritus) for Strategy, Marketing, Communications and Admissions, University of Central Florida 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Agenda WEDNESDAY, 25 NOVEMBER 2015 TIME LOCATION Exhibitor Registration Open 1700 Exhibitor Registration Close S220 of the South Concourse PRE-CONFERENCE AGENDA 0730 THURSDAY, 26 NOVEMBER 2015 CLOSED FOR THANKSGIVING FRIDAY, 27 NOVEMBER AND SATURDAY, 28 NOVEMBER 2015 TIME LOCATION 0730 Exhibitor Registration Open 1800 Exhibitor Registration Close S220 of the South Concourse SUNDAY, 29 NOVEMBER 2015 TIME LOCATION 0730 Exhibitor Registration Open S220 of the South Concourse 1200 Conference Registration Open S220 of the South Concourse 1200 All Satellite Registrations Open Multiple Hotels 1800 All Registrations Close Dress Code BRANCH CONFERENCE AND GENERAL SESSIONS BANQUET Army ACUs or Duty Uniform Army Blue (Army Evening Mess optional) Marine Corps Service “C” Evening Dress (Dress Blue “B” or Service “A” optional) Navy Service Khaki, Navy Service Uniform Dinner Dress White (Service Dress White optional) Air Force Short or Long Service Blues Service Dress Blue with tie and jacket (Mess Dress optional) Coast Guard Tropical Blue Long Dinner Dress White (Service Dress White optional) Civilian Business attire Black tie (optional) T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 7 MONDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 2015 TIME LOCATION AGENDA 0730 Conference and Exhibit Registration Open S220 of the South Concourse 0730 All Satellite Registrations Open Multiple Hotels 0830 - 1000 TUTORIALS (Synopses begin on page 18) Transmedia Learning in the Wild: Supporting Military Training Through Story-driven Engagement (1504) % Room S320A Introduction to HLA (1514) ñ Room S320C Fundamentals of Modeling and Simulation (1507) Room S320GH Enterprise Solutions for M&S Asset Discovery and Reuse (1518) Room S320E Natural Language Interaction in Simulations: Moving Beyond Pre-Coded Scripts (1536) % Room S320B Breathing New Life Into Old Assets (1539) Room S320F Building Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Teams: What Matters (1531) Room S320D 1030 - 1200 SIGNATURE EVENT: Congressional Modeling and Simulation Event (page 29) Room S310BCD 1245 - 1415 TUTORIALS (Synopses begin on page 21) 1400 Elevate Your Instruction: Practical Tactics to Maximize Military Learning (1516) Room S320A TENA/JMETC: An Innovative Architecture for Testing and Training (1509) Room S320C Planning and Execution of a Large Multi-Architecture Distributed LVC Event (1508) Room S320GH Simulation Conceptual Modeling Theory and Application (1534) Room S320E Speech-based Interaction: Myths, Challenges and Opportunities (1515) ñ Room S320B Three-Dimensional Display Technologies for Simulation and Training (1529) Room S320F Simulator Fidelity in Training: Informed Decision-Making to Maximize Effectiveness (1505) Room S320D Exhibits Open Exhibit Hall 1430 - 1600 FLOOR EVENT: O peration Blended Warrior (OBW) (page 39) Disaster Strikes Booth 339 and other floor locations 1430 - 1600 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: International Outreach (page 47) Room S310A 1430 - 1600 TUTORIALS (Synopses begin on page 25) An Introduction to Cognitive Systems for Modeling & Simulation (1511) Room S320A Distributed Interactive Simulation 101: The Basics (1538) Room S320C Model Verification and Validation Methods (1506) Room S320GH U.S. Export Controls 2015: Next Phase of Export Control Reform for the International Simulation Industry (1503) Room S320E Using HTML5 to Develop IMI, Simulations, and Games (1521) % Room S320B When Simple Becomes Complicated: Using Machinima for Training and Education (1533) % Room S320F Team and Collective Training Needs Analysis (1537) ñ Room S320D 1530 - 1700 SIGNATURE EVENT: DoD Small Business Programs (page 30) 1800 Exhibits Close 1800 All Registration Stations Close Warfighters Corner LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 8 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 2015 TIME LOCATION Conference and Exhibit Registration Open S220 of the South Concourse 0700 All Satellite Registrations Open Multiple Hotels 0745 Pre-Ceremony Music Central Florida VFW Musical Ensemble Hyatt Regency, Windermere Ballroom 0830 - 1000 OPENING CEREMONIES AGENDA 0700 Hyatt Regency/Windermere Call to Order Presentation of Colors National Anthem Invocation OPENING REMARKS Brent Smith, 2015 Conference Chair KEYNOTE ADDRESSES Admiral John M. Richardson, USN Waymon Armstrong Chief of Naval OperationsFounder and CEO of Engineering & Computer Simulations 1030 - 1200 SIGNATURE EVENT: General/Flag Officer Panel (page 31) 1200 Exhibits Open Hyatt Regency/Windermere Exhibit Hall 1200 - 1330 Lunch (Opening of Exhibits and Lunch will occur at 1200 or upon adjournment of the General/Flag Officer Panel) South B 1300 - 1330 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: PEO STRI Updates to TSIS Briefs: Field OPS (page 47) Booth 2280 1330 - 1400 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: PEO STRI Updates to TSIS Briefs: PM TRADE (page 47) Booth 2280 1400 - 1430 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: PEO STRI Updates to TSIS Briefs: Army Contracting Command (page 47) Booth 2280 1400 - 1530 PAPER SESSIONS Rooms S320A-F; S330C (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 53.) 1400 - 1530 SIGNATURE EVENT: Forging the Future of Navy Training (page 32) Room S330AB 1400 - 1530 FOCUS EVENT: Live-Synthetic Blended Training: From Home Station Environment to Battlespace Execution (page 41) Room S320GH 1530 - 1700 FLOOR EVENT: O peration Blended Warrior (OBW) (page 39) Immediate Response Booth 339 and other floor locations 1530 - 1700 FLOOR EVENT: Warfighters Corner, From the Tip of the Spear (page 40) Joint Warfighter Panelists: recently deployed Service men and women. Booth 2280 1530 - 1700 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: Air Force Acquisition Update (page 47) Room S320GH 1600 - 1730 PAPER SESSIONS Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 53.) 1700 - 1830 Exhibitor Networking Event Exhibit Hall 1800 Senior Leaders Networking Hour and M&S Awards Dinner, by invitation from NTSA only Hyatt Regency 1800 All Registration Stations Close 1830 Exhibits Close T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 9 WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 2015 TIME 0700 LOCATION Conference and Exhibit Registration Open AGENDA 0830 - 1000 PAPER SESSIONS S220 of the South Concourse Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 54.) 0830 - 1000 SPECIAL PAPER SESSION: Best Papers from Around the Globe (page 54) Room S210D 0830 - 1000 SIGNATURE EVENT: Forging the Future of Marine Corps Training (page 33) Room S310BCD 0830 - 1000 FOCUS EVENT: Medical Simulation and Training – A Joint Endeavor (page 42) Room S320GH 0830 - 1000 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: International Outreach (page 47) Room S310A 0830 - 1000 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: Asia Pacific Simulation Alliance Workshop (page 47) Room S330C 0900 - 1730 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: ADL Virtual World Sandbox PlugFest: Hands-on Tutorial (page 48) Room S330D 0930 Exhibits Open 1030 - 1200 PAPER SESSIONS Exhibit Hall Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 54.) 1030 - 1200 SPECIAL PAPER SESSION: Presentations from Future Leaders Pavilion (page 70) Room S210D 1030 - 1200 SIGNATURE EVENT: Training the Cyber Warrior: A Learner-Centric Model (page 34) Room S330AB 1030 - 1200 FLOOR EVENT: O peration Blended Warrior (OBW) (page 39) Countering Exploitation Booth 339 and other floor locations 1030 - 1200 FLOOR EVENT: Warfighters Corner, From the Tip of the Spear (page 40) Joint Warfighter Panelists: recently deployed Service men and women. Booth 2280 1030 - 1200 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: ETSA/SISO Briefing: International M&S Standards (page 48) Room S330C 1200 - 1330 Lunch South B 1200 - 1730 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: I/ITSEC Energy Forum: Demonstration and discussion of the latest training and simulation requirements in the energy sector (page 48) Room S210D 1300 - 1330 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: PEO STRI Updates to TSIS Briefs: PM ITTS (page 47) Booth 2280 1330 - 1400 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: PEO STRI Updates to TSIS Briefs: PM ITE (page 47) Booth 2280 1400 - 1430 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: PEO STRI Updates to TSIS Briefs: FMS (page 47) Booth 2280 1400 - 1530 PAPER SESSIONS Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 55.) 1400 - 1530 SIGNATURE EVENT: F-35 Lightning II – Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) (page 35) Room S320GH 1400 - 1530 FOCUS EVENT: Industry Involvement Initiative for NATO Exercises (I3X) – Lessons Learned (page 43) Room S330C 1600 - 1730 PAPER SESSIONS Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 55.) 10 1600 - 1730 SIGNATURE EVENT: I/ITSEC Fellows (page 36) Room S330AB 1600 - 1730 FLOOR EVENT: O peration Blended Warrior (OBW) (page 39) Securing the Skies Booth 339 and other floor locations 1600 - 1730 FOCUS EVENT: The Serious Games Showcase & Challenge: Celebrating 10 Years of Forging the Future Through Innovation (page 44) Room S320GH 1600 - 1730 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: Hiring America’s Service Members - DoD SkillBridge Forum (page 49) Warfighters Corner 1800 All Registration Stations Close 1800 Exhibits Close 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 2015 TIME 0700 LOCATION Conference and Exhibit Registration Open AGENDA 0830 - 1000 PAPER SESSIONS S220 of the South Concourse Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 56.) 0830 - 1000 SIGNATURE EVENT: Black Swan – Setting the Stage (page 37) Room S330AB 0830 - 1000 FOCUS EVENT: IGNITE! (page 45) Room S330C 0830 - 1000 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: Geospatial Environmental Database Standards Forum (page 49) Room S330D 0930 Exhibits Open Exhibit Hall 1030 - 1200 PAPER SESSIONS Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 56.) 1030 - 1200 SIGNATURE EVENT: Training Adaptive Leaders for a Black Swan World (page 38) Room S330AB 1030 - 1200 FLOOR EVENT: O peration Blended Warrior (OBW) (page 39) Overmatch: Forward from the Sea Booth 339 and other floor locations 1030 - 1200 FLOOR EVENT: Warfighters Corner, From the Tip of the Spear (page 40) Joint Warfighter Panelists: recently deployed Service men and women. Booth 2280 1030 - 1200 FOCUS EVENT: Visual Computing Event – Special Event (page 46) Room S320GH 1030 - 1200 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: Navy Vision: From the Training Systems Program Manager’s Perspective (page 49) Room S330C 1030 - 1200 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST: Design of Learning Games (page 49) Room S330D 1200 - 1330 Lunch South B 1300 AWARDS CEREMONY: Serious Games Showcase & Challenge (page 72) Warfighters Corner Stage 1345 AWARDS CEREMONY: Future Leaders (page 70) Warfighters Corner Stage 1330 - 1500 PAPER SESSIONS Rooms S320A-F (Title/Author List begins on page 58. Session schedules for this timeframe are on page 57.) 1500 Exhibit Hall and Registration Close Exhibit Hall 1800 Hosted Reception sponsored by Lockheed Martin Hyatt Regency, Windermere Foyer 1900 Reception Awards & Conference Awards Banquet Hyatt Regency Dinner Music provided by Bob Dehne on the Vibraphones Windermere Ballroom Best Paper Award Presentation RADM Fred Lewis Postgraduate I/ITSEC Scholarship After Dinner Entertainment provided by The Flashback Four b a n q u e t Passing of the Flag for I/ITSEC 2016 Dance Music provided by Captain Harry and the Surfriders FRIDAY, 4 DECEMBER 2015 TIME PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS (Synopses can be found on pages 75-76) 0800 - 1700 Serious Game Design Tutorial Room S330A 0800 - 1200 Certified Modeling & Simulation Professional (CMSP) Exam Preparation Room S330B 0800 - 1200 Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) Interoperability Techniques Room S330C 0800 - 1200 Modeling & Simulation for Acquisition Room S330D 0800 - 1200 Seamless Mobile Learning and Simulations Room S330E 0800 - 1200 Measuring the Impact and ROI of Training, Simulation, and Education Programs Room S330F T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 11 Continuing Education Units: An I/ITSEC Opportunity What sessions are CEU Eligible? (Updated for 2015.) C O N T I N U I N G E D U C AT I O N U N I T S / C O N T I N U O U S L E A R N I N G P O I N T S “CEUs are a convenient and efficient way to keep track of my participation in professional development activities.” Continuing Education Units (CEU) were established in 1970 to create a unit of measurement to quantify continuing education and training activities. CEUs apply to technical and educational settings such as I/ITSEC. The primary focus of I/ITSEC is to highlight innovative implementation of simulation and education technologies as tools to achieve cost efficient training and increased military readiness. Therefore CEUs are offered for all Tutorials, Paper Sessions, and the Professional Development Workshops. CEUs are being sponsored and maintained by the University of Central Florida, Division of Continuing Education. Why should I earn CEUs at I/ITSEC? • Participation in the tutorials, papers and/or Post-conference Workshops for CEU credit reinforces your commitment to remain current in the evolving technologies relating to training and simulation. • The CEU transcript indicates your active participation in the technical program of the conference to your employer. • Previous attendees have indicated that CEUs have assisted them in securing approval to attend the conference. • All Tutorials, Papers, and Professional Development Workshops are CEU eligible. Additionally, the I/ITSEC Fellows Signature Event is also Eligible. • Who may attend these events? Tutorials and Professional Development Workshops and the Fellows Event are open to everyone. The Paper Sessions are limited to registered conference attendees. • Does attending mean I automatically receive CEU credits? No. You have to let us know, via your registration, that you are interested in the credits. There is no charge for Paid Conference Attendees. However, if you are in an unpaid category (i.e. Exhibitor Personnel) there is a $45 charge, payable during registration. You may also register separately for the CEUs if you missed this step in your conference registration process. • We also ask that you be sure to mark your registration if you wish to attend the Professional Development Workshops held on Friday so that appropriate rooms/seating are in place. How do I receive CEUs at I/ITSEC? 1. Be sure you are appropriately registered (you can confirm when you check in onsite) for CEU credits. 2. Follow directions provided at each session to answer a few basic questions about the presentation. 3. Your CEU transcript will come to you via the University of Central Florida, Division of Continuing Education. Ten contact hours equate to one CEU credit. Contact Maria Cherjovsky at (407) 882-0247 or mariac@mail.ucf.edu for additional information Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition workforce members are expected to earn Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) to stay current in leadership and functional acquisition skills that augment the minimum education, training and experience standards established for certification purposes within their acquisition career fields. It is each acquisition member’s responsibility to meet the goal of 40 CLPs each year and to meet the mandatory requirement of 80 CLPs every two years. Acquisition Professional Activities are allowed to count toward CLPs. CLPs are awarded in accordance with DoD-wide guidelines as augmented by Service-specific policies. I/ITSEC provides an excellent opportunity for the DoD acquisition workforce members to earn mandatory CLPs. EARNING THE CMSP DESIGNATION WILL: • Demonstrate expertise in the field of M&S to your employer and the larger M&S community • Provide opportunities for professional advancement Requirements include 3-8 years of work experience (depending on level of highest collegiate degree), 3 professional letters of reference, and successful completion of an online examination. The completion of CEUs has long been used to demonstrate dedication and career interest to supervisors, employers CMSP Applicants now have a choice between CMSP-Technical and CMSP-Management exams. or rating officers. CEUs earned at I/ITSEC can be applied TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS AND TO APPLY, PLEASE VISIT WWW.SIMPROFESSIONAL.ORG OR CONTACT towards CMSP Recertification. PATRICK ROWE AT PROWE@NDIA.ORG. 12 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E South Concourse Orange County Convention Center, Orlando, Florida CONVENTION CENTER Although the buildings are large, a five minute walk will take you... • from the South Concourse to the North Concourse • from the South Concourse to the Hilton • from the South Concourse to the Hyatt Regency, formerly Peabody Orlando • from the South Concourse to the Rosen Center (In comparison, a walk from Hall A to Hall F in the West Concourse takes about ten minutes.) LEVEL 3 (Presentations/Events/Practice Rooms) LEVEL 2 (Entry Level) To Exhibit Floor To Exhibit Floor First Aid Self-Registration Onsite Registration Property Check Lost & Found Hyatt Regency Hilton Rosen Centre T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 13 RECREATION LEVEL H YAT T R E G E N C Y MEZZANINE LEVEL B-Line Diner ENTRY LEVEL Opening Ceremonies Keynote Speakers General/Flag Officer Panel Closing Banquet CONVENTION LEVEL Bus Drop Off Hyatt Regency Satellite Registration Desk 14 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E IN MEMORIAM LIEUTENANT COLONEL EARLE L. DENTON, U.S. Army (Ret.) The I/ITSEC family, along with the overall modeling and simulation technology community, mourns the loss of a significant participant in the history of I/ITSEC as well as other NTSA events. Earle Denton’s involvement in training issues is well known, to government and industry alike, for he was a professional of the first magnitude. As for training, Second Lieutenant Denton, had full appreciation in the value of being prepared and for his actions in the Battle for Pork Chop Hill. In the Korean War he was decorated with the Silver Star medal for his combat leadership in reclaiming a US Army strategic location that had been lost in an earlier battle. This experience, along with his leadership in the Vietnam War, where he commanded the 1st Battalion, 18th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division, provided impetus for his personal commitment to ensure that the U.S. Army is the best trained in the world. During his military career, Earle received a number of awards and decorations including the Silver Star to Legion of Merit with OLC, Purple Heart, and the Combat Infantryman Badge. In 2001 he was presented the Korean Ambassador of Peace and Appreciation Medallions by the Republic of Korea War Veterans. Subsequent to his military career Earle was recognized by various organizations for his lifelong contributions to their efforts in the advancement of technology development and employment of Modeling and Simulation for IN MEMORIAM March 16, 1930 – March 1, 2015 training. In 2001 Earle was presented the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) Lifetime Achievement Award. In 2012 Orange County Mayor Theresa Jacobs selected Earle to receive the Col W. Kittinger Medal of Achievement for his selfless act of giving to his country, his county and his community. Also in 2012, Earle was selected as the Distinguished Citizen of the year for Orange County, Florida District III. Unabashed and colorful, Earle often appeared wearing one of a collection of patriotic neckties; the accompanying photograph depicts friends at his funeral service wearing some of those ties, so symbolic of Earle’s patriotism and love of country. Receiving the Lifetime Achievement Award in 2001 Friends share and model Earle’s tie collection at his Memorial Service in Orlando in March 2015 T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 15 IN MEMORIAM WILLIAM F. (BILL) WAITE IN MEMORIAM October 17, 1946 - July 25, 2015 Bill and AEgis co-founder Steven Hill. 16 The I/ITSEC Community mourns the loss of Bill Waite, Co-founder and Chairman of The AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. and a leading advocate and promoter of modeling and simulation. Bill was impassioned about M&S education and worked diligently in advocacy and support of establishment of Master’s Degree and Ph.D. programs in M&S at UAH, UCF, Old Dominion Uni- Attendees at the recent SISO Simulation Inversity, the Naval Post Graduate School, teroperability Workshop remembered Bill by and others. He was an influential, active wearing ribbons denoting his familiar blue member of the Modeling and Simulation shirt/red striped tie “uniform.” Professional Certification Commission, which established the concept, protocols, testing, and training for the Certified Modeling & Simulation Professional (CMSP) program. He took his passion and energy to a national and international scale, creating and leading the international SimSummit Round Table from its inception in 2002, and providing critical and influential support to Congressmen Randy Forbes and Bobby Scott and the Congressional M&S Caucus in passing House Resolution 487 in 2007, which established M&S as a National Critical Technology. Bill was also a leading proponent of the sustained effort that resulted in standup of the National Modeling and Simulation Coalition in 2012. In addition, during the past two decades, he twice led the Society for Modeling and Simulation International (SCS) as Chairman of the Board of Directors, and served twice on the Executive Committee of the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO). Bill was also active in the National Training and Simulation Association (NTSA), served the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) as a member of its Board of Trustees, and was a member of the Board of Directors of Economic Development Partnership of Alabama Foundation. Beyond his leadership of AEgis, Bill spent a significant amount of his time working to raise national and international awareness and use of Modeling & Simulation technology. He worked diligently to transform the industry’s ability to collaborate and communicate through the establishment of industry forums such as the Alabama Modeling and Simulation Council (AMSC) and the Virginia Modeling and Simulation Partnership (VMSP). He additionally was a member of various NATO technical forums and groups. Bill’s energy, passion, expertise, and advocacy for M&S will long be remembered as singularly instrumental in the development of M&S as a Technology, Profession, Industry, and Marketplace. 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Tutorials M on d ay, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) I/ITSEC Tutorials are designed to serve three purposes: • Provide foundational educational material, including material essential to prepare for Certification as a Modeling and Simulation Professional (CMSP). • Serve as a refresher and more advanced learning opportunity for those seeking to maintain their certification. • Bring topics of special interest in Training, Simulation and Education to I/ITSEC attendees. TUTORIALS OPEN TO ALL ATTENDEES FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE, FOOD STATIONS ARE OPEN ON LEVEL TWO DURING MONDAY SESSIONS. TUTORIALS SCHEDULE ROOM S320A S320C TRACK/CHAIR Track 1: Simply The Best Michael Freeman, Ed.D. Track 2: Architectures Robert Lutz Track 3: S320GH Simple to Complex James Coolahan, Ph.D. S320E S320B Track 4: Policy & Processes Denise Nicholson, Ph.D. Track 5: Interacting with Users Charles Cohen, Ph.D. S320F S320D Track 6: Visual Arts Thomas Mastaglio, Ph.D. Track 7: New Dimensions in Training Luis Miguel Encarnação, Ph.D. 0830 – 1000 1245 – 1415 1430 – 1600 Transmedia Learning in the Wild: Supporting Military Training Through Story-driven Engagement (1504) % Elevate Your Instruction: Practical Tactics to Maximize Military Learning (1516) An Introduction to Cognitive Systems for Modeling & Simulation (1511) Introduction to HLA (1514) ñ TENA/JMETC: An Innovative Architecture for Testing and Training (1509) DIS 101: The Basics (1538) Fundamentals of Modeling and Simulation (1507) Planning and Execution of a Large Multi-Architecture Distributed LVC Event (1508) Model Verification and Validation Methods (1506) Enterprise Solutions for M&S Asset Discovery and Reuse (1518) Simulation Conceptual Modeling Theory and Application (1534) U.S. Export Controls 2015: Next Phase of Export Control Reform for the International Simulation Industry (1503) Natural Language Interaction in Simulations: Moving Beyond Pre-Coded Scripts (1536) % Speech-based Interaction: Myths, Challenges and Opportunities (1515) ñ Using HTML5 to Develop IMI, Simulations, and Games (1521) % Breathing New Life Into Old Assets (1539) Three-Dimensional Display Technologies for Simulation and Training (1529) When Simple Becomes Complicated: Using Machinima for Training and Education (1533) % Building Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Teams: What Matters (1531) Simulator Fidelity in Training: Informed Decision-Making to Maximize Effectiveness (1505) Team and Collective Training Needs Analysis (1537) ñ LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 17 Mo n d a y, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TUTORIALS TRACK 1: M&S: SIMPLY THE BEST 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320A TRACK 2: ARCHITECTURES 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320C Transmedia Learning in the Wild: Supporting Military Training Through Story-driven Engagement (1504) % Introduction to HLA Technology-mediated solutions for learning, instruction, and assessment are often intended for use by schoolhouses or formal training programs. Few address informal learning or self-paced “learning in the wild.” This tutorial addresses this gap by discussing transmedia learning design specifically for informal learning and by offering open source software approaches to unobtrusively track learner progress. Transmedia learning is social, story-driven, unfolds across multiple media, and designed to promote self-directed engagement. The first section of the tutorial defines and describes how and why transmedia learning can be a game-changer for training and education. The second section explores the design and development of a “Warrior-Athlete” transmedia learning ecosystem, a use case shared by the Services, VA, NATO, industry, and Federal Government alike. Strategies for the use of massively open online course (MOOC) platforms, mobile apps, social media, videos, machinima, virtual environments, and games are provided. The third section demonstrates open source software for tracking engagement in transmedia learning ecosystems such as the experience API, learning record store, analytics dashboard, competency frameworks, and a game/collaborative 3D virtual environment. No prerequisite knowledge is required. Program managers, researchers, designers, and developers who are interested in 1) transmedia storytelling to engage learners, and 2) the design and implementation of transmedia learning ecosystems will take away practical strategies, resources, tools, and software for their own use. The High-Level Architecture (HLA) is the leading international standard for simulation interoperability. It originated in the defense communities but is increasingly used in other domains. This tutorial gives an introduction to the HLA standard. It describes the requirements for interoperability, flexibility, composability and reuse and how HLA meets them. It also describes the new features of the most recent version: HLA Evolved (IEEE-1516-2010) and the road ahead. Finally it provides some recent experiences of the use of HLA in NATO M&S groups as well as an overview of recent evolution of Federation Object Models for military platform simulation. This tutorial is intended for all audiences; however, some familiarity with basic principles of distributed computing is recommended. Presenter ELAINE M. RAYBOURN, Ph.D., is a Principal Member of the Technical Staff in Cognitive Science & Systems at Sandia National Laboratories and a European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics (ERCIM) Fellow who has worked in research laboratories in Germany, England, and France. Elaine is on assignment to the Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness). As a social scientist, her greatest passion involves designing immersive experiences that present opportunities to hone intercultural communication competence, self-awareness, and adaptability. To that end she led the development of an award-winning Government game. She serves on several editorial boards including Interactive Technology and Smart Education, Journal of Game-based Learning, and Simulation & Gaming. She conducts research on transmedia learning, next generation learning ecosystems, and the anthropology of next generation learners’ interactions with future technology. Elaine is a recipient of the Department of the Army Award for Patriotic Civilian Service. (1514) ñ Presenters BJÖRN MÖLLER is the vice president and co-founder of Pitch Technologies, the leading supplier of tools for the High-Level Architecture (HLA). He leads the strategic development of Pitch HLA products. He serves on several HLA standards and working groups and has a wide international contact network in simulation interoperability. He has twenty years of experience in high-tech R&D companies, with an international profile in areas such as modeling and simulation, artificial intelligence and Web-based collaboration. He is currently serving as the chair of the SISO RPR FOM Product Development Group and the vice chair of the SISO HLA Evolved Product Support Group. ROBERT LUTZ is a principal staff scientist at The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, MD. His background includes 35 years of practical experience in the development, use, and management of models and simulations across all phases of the DoD systems acquisition process. He currently serves as the Airspace Integration Modeling and Simulation (M&S) lead for the Navy’s Triton Program and has led the development of several M&S standards (IEEE 1516.2, IEEE 1516.3, IEEE 1730). Mr. Lutz also serves as the Chair of the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) Board of Directors, serves on the Tutorial Board and Fellows Committee at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), and is a guest lecturer on M&S-related topics in The Johns Hopkins University Whiting School of Engineering. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter 18 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E M on d ay, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TRACK 4: POLICY AND PROCESSES 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320E Fundamentals of Modeling and Simulation (1507) Enterprise Solutions for M&S Asset Discovery and Reuse (1518) TUTORIALS TRACK 3: M&S: SIMPLE TO COMPLEX 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320GH This tutorial has been designed by a team of subject matter experts to prepare attendees to understand the scope of I/ITSEC presentations and demonstrations. It provides definitions of widely-used technical terms, while explaining the range and types of models and simulations that are commonly applied in the M&S domain. The tutorial reviews major simulation architectures (HLA, TENA, DIS), the basics of instructional design, a description of the major standards and best practices available for use across the M&S problem space, and a brief presentation of resources that can provide further information. The tutorial introduces topics that are examined more extensively in other tutorials. The tutorial is designed to be technically focused and is not intended to overview management or governance of M&S within the US DoD. Reuse of M&S assets including models, simulations, data, architectures, designs, and requirements (collectively referred to as M&S assets hereafter) is critical to providing cost-effective M&S solutions. The first step in reuse is to understand what assets exist, and then to have mechanisms to access them. However, most M&S practitioners and managers are largely unaware of the wealth of existing M&S assets or where to find them. Significant advances have been made recently to more effectively support discovery and reuse of assets across the M&S enterprise, both within the U.S. DoD and internationally. Following sound industry practices and DoD guidance, we have migrated to a set of federated discovery and access mechanisms. Tutorial attendees will learn what types of M&S assets can be discovered, how and where to search for them, and how to access them. Attendees will also learn how they can make their own assets available to others for reuse. The tutorial will begin with the motivation and busiPresenters JAMES E. COOLAHAN, Ph.D., is the Chief Technology Officer of ness case for M&S asset reuse, and then through descriptions Coolahan Associates, LLC, having retired from full-time employment and demonstrations, show how M&S assets can be discovered at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/ and accessed. APL) in December 2012 after 40 years of service. He currently chairs the M&S Committee of the Systems Engineering Division of the National Defense Industrial Association, and teaches courses in M&S for Systems Engineering in the JHU Engineering for Professionals M.S. program. He holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in aerospace engineering from the University of Notre Dame and the Catholic University of America, respectively, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in computer science from JHU and the University of Maryland, respectively. Presenters ROY SCRUDDER is the Program Manager for the M&S Information Management Group at the Applied Research Laboratories, The University of Texas at Austin (ARL:UT). Mr. Scrudder served as the Associate Director for Data at the DoD M&S Coordination Office (DMSCO) from 2005-2009. He has over 30 years’ experience in information systems analysis and development, recently concentrating in M&S information management. His experiences are data management S. K. NUMRICH, Ph.D., CMSP, holds an AB, MA and Ph.D. in physand data engineering, specializing in metadata. He has contributed ics and worked as a research physicist at the Naval Research Labto the Enterprise Data Services, Joint Strike Fighter Product Developoratory plying her trade in a variety of fields including underwater ment Metadata Specification, M&S Community of Interest Discovery sound in the Arctic (yes, aboard ship), fluid-structure interactions, Metadata Specification, and DoD M&S Resource Repository Board of parallel processing, modeling and simulation and virtual reality. Directors. Mr. Scrudder holds a B.S. in Applied Mathematics from Upon leaving government service, Dr. Numrich has joined IDA. the University of Tennessee. ROBERT RICHBOURG, Ph.D., is a member of the Research Staff at the Institute for Defense Analyses. He is a retired Army officer who holds a B.S. in Mathematics, and M.S. and Ph.D. in Computer Science. In his last active duty assignment, he was an Academy Professor and Director of the Artificial Intelligence Center at the United States Military Academy, West Point. He is the 2015 Chair of the I/ ITSEC Tutorial Board. FRANK MULLEN is a senior scientist at SimVentions and was previously an associate director at the DoD M&S Coordination Office (DMSCO), helping develop the Defense M&S Catalog. He gained over twenty‐five years of defense‐related engineering and management experience at the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, specializing in integrated circuits and microwave devices, and contributed to development of tactical and strategic guidance systems. On active and reserve duty, he served afloat and ashore, deployed to the Mideast, and spent four years on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff. He retired as a captain after thirty years of service. Mr. Mullen is a graduate of the US Coast Guard Academy, the U.S. Naval War College, Defense Acquisition University, and the California Institute of Technology. He holds degrees in electrical engineering and physics. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 19 Mo n d a y, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TUTORIALS TRACK 5: INTERACTING WITH USERS 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320B TRACK 6: VISUAL ARTS 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320F Natural Language Interaction in Simulations: Moving Beyond Pre-Coded Scripts (1536) % Breathing New Life Into Old Assets (1539) Natural language interactions can increase engagement in online training, simulation, and performance support environments. Avatars that give prompts, hints, and feedback can be used with great effect as non-player characters (NPC’s) in games and simulations or as tutors in intelligent tutoring systems. In these applications, the avatars have traditionally interacted with and responded to learners using pre-encoded dialogue trees or templates. This results in unnatural sounding dialogue and limits the ability of the avatar to respond when the learner wanders off topic or changes the subject. Today, however, it is possible to build dialogue engines that process spoken input and respond in surprisingly natural and intelligent ways. This tutorial is an introduction to the current capabilities of dialogue engines, their implementation, and their use in training environments. Topics include the AI behind chat bots, selecting a dialogue engine, building a library of domain knowledge, training-the-trainers for virtual tutors, matching technology to training goals, and incorporating chat into training and simulation. This tutorial provides insights into how these technologies work and demonstrates ways to leverage open source products and native browser functionality to start making your training talk with learners. Computer graphics hardware has come a long way. Modern games provide unprecedented levels of visual quality that often surpasses the quality of existing visual simulation systems. Trying to bring modern effects into older systems faces several challenges: a need for new hardware, new software and new assets. The last one is especially problematic, as in many cases it represents the bulk of the required effort. For modernizing an existing visual environment in the face of budget constraints it can be impossible to argue for a full set of new assets. The goal of this tutorial is to introduce methods for developers and maintainers of existing visual environments to add modern graphics effects without needing to fully rebuild existing assets. The core element is the ability to freely program the current graphics hardware using so-called shaders. Effects like per-pixel lighting, bump and normal maps, forward and deferred shading as well as shadows and image effects like motion blur, screen-space ambient occlusion for soft shadows and others can be added with no or limited modeling effort. The Unity development framework will be used to demonstrate fast experimentation and present outlines on how to integrate the described effects into custom software using libraries like OpenGL. Presenters ROBBY ROBSON, Ph.D., began developing web-based learning content and learning management systems in 1995 and has led multiple Department of Defense and National Science Foundation projects that have applied emerging technologies to learning, education, and training. He has published extensively in areas ranging from mathematics to web-based learning and standards development. Dr. Robson chaired the IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee from 2000 to 2008 and co-founded Eduworks Corporation in 2001 where he has guided research, services, and product development and serves as CEO. He holds a doctorate in mathematics from Stanford University and has held leadership posts in both academia and industry. Presenters DIRK REINERS, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in the Department of Information Science at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. His research focuses on interactive 3D graphics and Virtual Reality applications development and making high-quality, high-speed graphics usable. He has an MS and a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the Technical University Darmstadt and has worked for more than 10 years in applied research at Fraunhofer IGD before joining academia at Iowa State University, The University of Louisiana at Lafayette and now at UALR. He is the project lead for the OpenSG Open Source scenegraph project. CARSTEN NEUMANN is a Senior Research Scientist in computer graphics and visualization at the Emerging Analytics Center at the ELAINE KELSEY is a software engineer at Eduworks focusing on de- University of Arkansas at Little Rock. He has been working on a varivelopment of conversational dialogue agents for intelligent tutoring ety of applications of Virtual Reality for the last 10 years and is a lead systems, natural language processing and semantic analysis. She has developer of the OpenSG Open Source scenegraph project. He has an developed multi-cultural interfaces for global software deployments; M.S. in Mathematics from the Technical University Darmstadt. designed algorithms for improving cost pool allocation in financial planning and analysis software for global nonprofit organizations; and worked on the integration of idiomatic and dialectal forms in natural language translation. Elaine speaks eight languages and has a B.S. in Computer Science from Oregon State University, a B.A. in Scandinavian Languages and B.S. in Cell and Molecular Biology from the University of Washington, and a MPH from Tulane University. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter 20 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E M on d ay, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TRACK 1: M&S: SIMPLY THE BEST 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320A Building Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Teams: What Matters (1531) Elevate your Instruction: Practical Tactics to Maximize Military Learning (1516) The military has long recognized having a successful team requires more than assembling individuals who are highly competent in their jobs. Successful teams require both taskwork and teamwork skills in order to effectively coordinate in an adaptive manner (Salas et al., 1992). This awareness has caused the military to invest heavily in team training. Over the last thirty years much has been learned. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in the use/creation of intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) for teams which can be adapted to multiple training situations. From a technological standpoint much can be leveraged from the work on intelligent tutors for individuals; however, teams are more than the individual sum of their parts (i.e., members). The purpose of this tutorial will be to highlight the process of working through the complexity involved and offering scientifically-grounded best practices which illustrate a way ahead in building an ITS for teams. Best practices and principles will be extracted from the scientific literature and the authors’ combined experience (over 25 years) in conducting research on military teams. Discussions will cover the lifecycle of development – e.g., learning goals/content, scenario development, and measurement/ evaluation. The impact of quality instructors (teachers, trainers, coaches, and educators) can’t be understated. Research findings reveal that “…the most important factor affecting student learning is the teacher” (Sanders, Wright, & Horn, 1997, p. 61), and typical results show that a one standard deviation increase in teacher quality raises student outcomes by approximately .20-.24 standard deviations (Rockoff, 2004). When discussing instructional technologies, the message is much the same: Their delivery and interaction methods have a profound effect on learner outcomes. This tutorial summarizes the existing research on instructor effectiveness, and it translates those concepts into a military setting. Attendees will leave with a clear argument for defending the value and return on investment of instructor development, and they’ll gain a practical, actionable set of instructional strategies, tactics, and assessment methods to begin using immediately with human teachers and trainers as well as instructional technologies and training simulations. Presenters C. SHAWN BURKE, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor (Research) at the Institute for Simulation and Training of the University of Central Florida. Her expertise includes teams and their leadership, team adaptability, team training, measurement, evaluation, and team effectiveness. ROBERT A. SOTTILARE, Ph.D., leads adaptive training research within the US Army Research Laboratory focusing on automated authoring, automated instructional management, and evaluation tools and methods for intelligent tutoring systems. TUTORIALS TRACK 7: NEW DIMENSIONS IN TRAINING 0830 – 1000 • ROOM S320D Presenter SAE SCHATZ, Ph.D., currently serves as the Director of the Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) Initiative, a research and development unit overseen by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness). Before joining ADL, she worked in industry, as the chief scientist for MESH Solutions LLC, and before that in academia, as an Assistant Professor at the University of Central Florida. During her time as a technical performer, Sae contributed to a variety of science and technology efforts for agencies such as the Office of Naval Research, Army Research Lab, Marine Corps Training and Education Command, and Special Operations Command, and she’s earned accolades for this work. In 2010, for instance, Sae led the team who received an NTSA Modeling & Simulation Award for Training, and she has received the I/ITSEC best paper award twice: first in 2012 for her work on the Marine Corps’ Making Good Instructors Great and again in 2014 for work on Joint Blended Learning. EDUARDO SALAS, Ph.D., is a Professor of Psychology at Rice University. His expertise includes helping organizations on fostering teamwork, the design and implementation of team straining strategies, facilitating training effectiveness, and the design of learning and simulation-based environments. JOAN JOHNSTON, Ph.D., has been a U.S. Military research psychologist for 25 years. Her current research focus is on training effectiveness with an emphasis on training transfer. Dr. Johnston’s areas of expertise include training and decision support systems for tactical decision making under stress, team performance and team training technologies, and embedded and distributed simulation-based training. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 21 Mo n d a y, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TUTORIALS TRACK 2: ARCHITECTURES 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320C TRACK 3: M&S: SIMPLE TO COMPLEX 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320GH TENA/JMETC: An Innovative Architecture for Testing and Training (1509) Planning and Execution of a Large Multi-Architecture Distributed LVC Event (1508) The Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA) and the Joint Mission Environment Test Capability (JMETC) program provide an advanced set of interoperability software, interfaces, and connectivity for use in joint distributed testing and training. This tutorial will provide information about how TENA works and why it is important to the test and training communities, with some comparison to other interoperability architectures. TENA provides testers and trainers software such as the TENA Middleware—a high-performance, real-time, low-latency communication infrastructure that is used by training range instrumentation software and tools during execution of a range training event. The standard TENA Object Models provide data definitions for common range entities and thus enables semantic interoperability among training range applications. The TENA tools, utilities, and gateways assist in creating and managing an integration of range resources. The current version of the TENA Middleware, Release 6.0.4, is being used by the range community for testing, training, evaluation, and feedback and is being used in major exercises in the present. JMETC has created a persistent test and evaluation capability throughout the US DoD, connecting many test ranges together, and including a bridge to the Joint Training and Experimentation Network (JTEN); a set of TENA-compliant software middleware, interfaces, tools, and databases; and a process for creating large distributed test events. The combination of TENA and JMETC gives testers and trainers unprecedented power to craft a joint distributed mission environment that forges the future for innovative testing and training. Distributed simulation technologies have changed the way the DoD does RD&E, training, analysis, and testing. These technologies and associated standards have been in use for 20 years and have been documented in many forums. However a critical element that has not been widely documented is the processes and tools required to execute a large multi-architecture distributed event. There are organizations that do these types of events very well, but the only way for the new practitioner to lean these skills is to be a member of one of these teams. This tutorial provides a guide to the planning and execution of a large multi-architecture distributed event. This guide will include the steps to planning and executing an event including design of the simulation architecture, planning integration spirals, scenario development and rehearsal, conduct of the event, data collection and analysis. While the steps described in this tutorial are applicable to all large distributed events, special emphasis will be placed on multi-architecture based events. An example will be provided showing how to select architectures and object models. This tutorial is applicable to anyone involved in the development a large test event. The material will be applicable to simulation architects, analysts, scenario developers, simulation users, and managers. Presenter EDWARD T. POWELL, Ph.D., is a lead architect for the Test and Training Enabling Architecture. After receiving his Ph.D. in Astrophysics from Princeton University, he worked for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory performing simulation-based analysis. He moved to SAIC (now Leidos) in 1994, and participated as lead architect in some of the most complex distributed simulation programs in DoD, including the Joint Precision Strike Demonstration (JPSD), the Synthetic Theater of War (STOW)and the Joint Simulation System (JSIMS). He then worked in the intelligence community for two years on architectures for integrating large-scale diverse ISR systems. He has been the lead architect for TENA for over twelve years, and is currently working on expanding the applicability of TENA, and integrating TENA with broader DoD-wide Data Management systems. Presenter MICHAEL J. O’CONNOR, CMSP, is a Senior Program Manager at Trideum Corporation. Mr. O’Connor has more than 25 years’ experience in Modeling and Simulation (M&S). He has been a key participant in the development of distributed modeling and simulation standards, including IEEE 1278 and IEEE 1516. He has held many positions in the community, including Chairman of the SISO Standards Activities Committee and Chairman of the SISO Executive Committee. He served as the chair of the I/ITSEC Simulation Subcommittee. Mr. O’Connor currently supports the technical integration of the “Always On – On Demand” program. He has led the development of multiple simulations using DIS, HLA, and TENA. Mr. O’Connor has led the technical integration of several large multi-architecture distributed events including the Multi-Served Distributed Event (MSDE) in 2005 that used DIS, HLA, and TENA. MSDE included over 20 sites and included organizations from the Army, Navy, and Air Force. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Computer Engineering from Auburn University, and a master of science in Computer Science from the University of Alabama in Huntsville. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter 22 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E M on d ay, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TRACK 5: INTERACTING WITH USERS 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320B Simulation Conceptual Modeling Theory and Application (1534) Speech-based Interaction: Myths, Challenges and Opportunities (1515) ñ Simulation conceptual modeling is a critical step in simulation development frequently overlooked in the rush to demonstrate program progress. A simulation conceptual model is an abstraction from either the existing or a notional physical world that serves as a frame of reference for further simulation development by documenting simulation-independent views of important entities and their key actions and interactions. A simulation conceptual model describes what the simulation will represent, the assumptions limiting those representations, and other capabilities needed to satisfy the stakeholder’s requirements. It bridges between these requirements, and simulation design. This tutorial will present the theory and application of simulation conceptual modeling as documented during the research done by the NATO MSG 058 and SISO SCM SG/SSG/PDG. In addition, Use Cases that have been drawn from previous conference presentations will be presented to illustrate how conceptual modeling has been performed. Additional work is necessary to mature the stateof-the-art of simulation conceptual modeling before a recommended practices guide could be standardized. This tutorial has been created to continue the maturation of the simulation conceptual modeling best practices. Recent developments have enabled advanced interaction so that users can more realistically interact with serious games in virtual environments. Unfortunately, it is complex to allow users to fully interact through speech, particularly in areas where the task is unconstrained and performed under adverse conditions. As such, speech has been often neglected as a modality that can enhance the naturalness of interacting with virtual training systems. Furthermore, user-based evaluations of speech interfaces are intrinsically difficult. Recent research indicates there are several interesting areas and approaches that could improve the design and implementation of training systems. This tutorial will explain how Automatic Speech Recognition and Speech Synthesis work; the challenges in enabling speech as a modality for hands-free interaction; some usability issues in speech-based interaction systems; opportunities for researchers and developers to enhance system interactivity by enabling speech, and how to enable speech-based interaction within immersive, mixed-reality environments. The tutorial is intended for developers interested in implementing speech recognition in interactive applications, as well as for researchers dedicated to developing methods and systems that allow humans to naturally interact with technology. Presenter JAKE BORAH, CMSP, was a Senior Member of Technical Staff for AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. He has been assigned as Project Manager or Technical Lead on several projects that require a high degree of modeling and simulation expertise and a capability to integrate leading edge technology into ongoing processes. His most recent conceptual modeling has been for the Air Force Modeling and Simulation Training Toolkit (AFMSTT). He has frequently supported US and Canadian government sponsored military simulation projects because of his mastery of the M&S technology, and expertise in High Level Architecture federation development. He is a Charter Certified Modeling and Simulation Professional (CMSP). He is a recognized expert and a prominent member of the worldwide M&S community as reflected by his contributions to the Simulation Interoperability and Standards Organization (SISO) workshops and products. He has taught M&S classes and given tutorials in academic, government and industrial forums throughout the world from Asia to Europe during the last 18 years. He graduated from the United States Air Force Academy in 1974 and possesses a Master of Aeronautical Science degree from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. TUTORIALS TRACK 4: POLICY AND PROCESSES 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320E Presenters COSMIN MUNTEANU, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at the Institute for Communication, Culture, Information, and Technology (University of Toronto at Mississauga). Until 2014 he was a Research Officer with the National Research Council of Canada. His area of expertise is at the intersection of Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), having extensively studied imperfect speech recognition systems, and designed and evaluated systems that improve humans’ interaction with immersive technologies through speech and natural language (such as advanced learning systems and mixed reality training simulators). His interests include speech and natural language interaction for mobile devices, mixed reality systems, learning technologies for marginalized users, and assistive technologies. He has authored numerous publications in HCI, ASR, and Computational Linguistics. GERALD PENN, Ph.D., is a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Toronto. His area of expertise is in the study of human languages, both from a mathematical and computational perspective. Dr. Penn is one of the leading scholars in Computational Linguistics, with significant contributions to the formal study of natural languages. His publications cover many areas, from Theoretical Linguistics, to Mathematics, and to Automatic Speech Recognition, as well as Human-Computer Interaction. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 23 Mo n d a y, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TUTORIALS TRACK 6: VISUAL ARTS 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320F TRACK 7: NEW DIMENSIONS IN TRAINING 1245 – 1415 • ROOM S320D Three-Dimensional Display Technologies for Simulation and Training Simulator Fidelity in Training: Informed Decision-Making to Maximize Effectiveness (1505) (1529) The human visual system naturally processes information in three dimensions, yet the majority of simulation and training applications utilize two-dimensional display technology. Three-dimensional displays introduce significant benefits to human performance, including reduction in cognitive load, improved spatial understanding, improved processing time, greater knowledge gains, and improved student perceptions on learning. These improvements exist in diverse subject areas, including medical diagnosis, navigation, imagery analysis, and geospatial visualization. Based on these proven benefits, the use of 3D display technologies for training and simulation has the potential for significant beneficial results. Within this tutorial, the basics of 3D perception, including the human visual system and depth cues, are explained. The presentation then covers current 3D display technologies, including the functionality of different displays and the depth cues they present. The presenter will discuss the beneficial impacts 3D displays have on human performance. The tutorial will cover areas of simulation and training suitable for 3D display technology, and will discuss ongoing research in those areas. This tutorial is designed for those interested in understanding more about 3D displays, their potential benefits, and application areas in training and simulation. Engineers, project managers, researchers, and scientists should attend. No prior exposure to 3D display technology is required. Presenter MATTHEW HACKETT is a research engineer for the Medical Simulation Research Branch of the Army Research Laboratory, Simulation and Training Technology Center. He manages a variety of projects including medical hologram, virtual patients, and medical serious games. Mr. Hackett received his Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering from the University of Central Florida and his Masters of Science in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Florida. He is currently pursuing his Ph.D. in Modeling and Simulation at the University of Central Florida. The term Fidelity is formally defined as “the accuracy of the representation when compared to the real world”. This notion typically demands that the customer and simulator (or system) designer iterate to specify the required hardware and software characteristics to meet the stated training objectives. Fidelity, as it relates to cost, certainly speaks to why simulators have been vastly underutilized in civilian training. Often times, the simulation Fidelity present is governed not by what is required, but by the financial limitations of the training organization in question. This necessitates that the customer prioritize their requirements, which ultimately results in compromise and trade-offs. Accordingly, the primary goal of this Tutorial is to introduce the notion of Fidelity in simulation-based training, and explore how its determination requires a systematic process of informed decision-making. We will summarize techniques for establishing preferences and priorities based on Fidelity needs, and offer guidelines for optimizing related trade-off decisions for training system acquisition. As the centerpiece of this Tutorial, we will highlight three Case Studies (of advancing complexity), both to demonstrate the specific techniques presented in this Tutorial, and to justify the critical need for appropriately specified simulation technology in both civilian and military training applications. Presenter KEVIN HULME, Ph.D., received his Ph.D. from the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at the University at Buffalo in 2000, where his area of expertise was multidisciplinary analysis and optimization of complex systems. For the past decade, Dr. Hulme has served as the technical lead of the Motion Simulation Laboratory at the Center for Engineering Design and Applied Simulation at the University at Buffalo. He and his research team focus on the custom design and development of ground vehicle simulations for applications in: clinical research, education and training, and next-generation transportation and safety studies. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter 24 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E M on d ay, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TRACK 2: ARCHITECTURES 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320C An Introduction to Cognitive Systems for Modeling & Simulation (1511) DIS 101: The Basics There are increasing requirements for automated reasoning abilities across the broad spectrum of modeling and simulation, as well as in battlefield information and control systems. Additionally, the cognitive capabilities that have been developed and tested in simulation are migrating to real-world systems. Cognitive systems represent a maturing computational approach to intelligence that can provide robust, scalable, and adaptive decision making. This tutorial provides an introduction to cognitive systems, concentrating on production system computation and high-level design of human-like reasoning systems. We draw examples and comparisons from existing cognitive systems, focusing on the tradeoffs between cognitive and non-cognitive modeling approaches. The tutorial content does not require any specialized knowledge, but some experience with software engineering or behavior modeling can be helpful. Attendees will learn to recognize problems that suggest cognitively based solutions, and they will be better able to assess risks, costs, and benefits of different approaches. This tutorial is targeted toward developers interested in cognitive approaches to software engineering, as well as customers who have problems that may be amenable to a cognitive approach. Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) is one of the three major modeling and simulation standards used in military M&S. This tutorial will provide an overview of the problem domain for modeling and simulation in virtual environments, briefly discuss the standards used by modeling and simulation, and then provide an overview of the DIS protocol. The messages that constitute DIS and the techniques used by DIS to implement a virtual environment are discussed, as are simple examples for sending and receiving DIS messages. Presenters RANDOLPH M. JONES, Ph.D., Senior Artificial Intelligence Engineer at SoarTech, is a leading developer of knowledge-rich intelligent agent software. He has been principal investigator for a variety of advanced R&D projects for ONR, ARI, DMSO, DARPA and other agencies. He has previously held positions at Colby College, the University of Michigan, the University of Pittsburgh, and Carnegie Mellon University. His areas of research include computational models of human learning and problem solving, executable psychological models, and full-spectrum intelligent behavior models. He earned a B.S. in Mathematics and Computer Science at UCLA, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of California, Irvine. TUTORIALS TRACK 1: M&S: SIMPLY THE BEST 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320A (1538) Presenters DON MCGREGOR is a research associate at the Naval Postgraduate School. He is the primary author of Open-DIS, an implementation of the Distributed Interactive Simulation protocol in Java, C++, C#, and Javascript. His research interests include web-based simulation and scalable server side architectures. DON BRUTZMAN, Ph.D., is Technical Director for 3D Visual Simulation and Networked Virtual Environments in the MOVES Institute. As an Associate Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey California, he is a member of two Academic Groups: Undersea Warfare (UW) and Modeling, Virtual Environments and Simulation (MOVES). He is an investigator in the NPS Center for Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) Research. His research interests include underwater robotics, real-time 3D computer graphics, artificial intelligence and high performance networking. He is a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Special Interest Group on Graphics (SIGGRAPH) and the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). DYLAN SCHMORROW, Ph.D., Chief Scientist at SoarTech, leads the effort to build intelligent systems for defense, government, and commercial applications that emulate human decision making. He also serves as a Potomac Institute for Policy Studies Senior Fellow, Editor of the Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Journal, and the Technical Advisor for the Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics Conference Series. He is a leading expert on national security research, technology, and policy related to information technology, medical research and human performance applications. Past service includes OSD, DARPA, NAWC, NRL, ONR, NPS, and Executive Assistant to the Chief of Naval Research. Dr. Schmorrow holds a Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology from Western Michigan University, as well as M.S. degrees in Psychology and Philosophy. He retired from the U.S. Navy as a Captain in 2013. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 25 Mo n d a y, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TUTORIALS TRACK 3: M&S: SIMPLE TO COMPLEX 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320GH TRACK 4: POLICY AND PROCESSES 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320E Model Verification and Validation Methods (1506) U.S. Export Controls 2015: Next Phase of Export Control Reform for the International Simulation Industry (1503) Verification and Validation (V&V) are essential prerequisites to the credible and reliable use of a model. But what are V&V, and what is their purpose within a modeling and simulation project? What types of potential errors can occur during V&V and how can they be avoided? What methods are available to perform verification and validation in a rigorous and effective manner? The tutorial is intended to answer these questions. It has three distinct parts. The first part motivates the need for V&V, provides definitions necessary to their understanding, and explains why all V&V methods can be understood as comparisons and how this informs their application. The second part provides guidelines for selecting V&V methods for a particular model, introduces a widely used categorization of V&V methods, defines four categories of V&V methods, and describes two or more methods from each category. Example applications of the described methods are presented. In the third part, longer case studies of V&V in practice are presented, showing how V&V methods have been applied in actual modeling and simulation projects. This tutorial will focus on the continuing changes in 2015 as a result of the ongoing Export Control Reform initiative that has transformed the controls applicable to simulation hardware, software and services. The tutorial will include a focus on examples and practical application of the revised regulations to simulation products and services. Revisions to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (U.S. Munitions List Category IX) and the Export Administration Regulations (ECCN 0A614 et al.) have dramatically altered the controls on simulation products from software to services. Definitional changes are expected for key terms such as “defense services”, “technical data”, “public domain” and “export” and will continue to change the rules on exporting and importing simulation technology. Participants will understand the scope of the U.S. export laws, continuing changes and reform, how the U.S. Government applies them to the simulation industry, including controls on software, hardware, services and activities at trade shows such as I/ITSEC, as well as strategies for ensuring compliance in commercial, U.S. government and foreign contracts. Presenter MIKEL D. PETTY, Ph.D., CMSP, is Director of the University of Alabama in Huntsville’s (UAH) Center for Modeling, Simulation, and Analysis and an Associate Professor of Computer Science. Prior to joining UAH, he was Chief Scientist at Old Dominion University’s Virginia Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation Center and Assistant Director at the University of Central Florida’s Institute for Simulation and Training. He received a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Central Florida in 1997. Dr. Petty has worked in modeling and simulation research and education since 1990 in areas that include verification and validation methods, simulation interoperability and composability, simulation software frameworks, and human behavior modeling. He has published over 190 research papers and has been awarded over $16 million in research funding. He served on a National Research Council committee on modeling and simulation, is a Certified Modeling and Simulation Professional, and is an editor of the journal SIMULATION. He has served as dissertation advisor to five graduated Ph.D. students, including the first two students to complete a Ph.D. in Modeling and Simulation at Old Dominion University and the first student to complete a Ph.D. in Modeling and Simulation at UAH. Presenters JEREMY HUFFMAN is a founding member and partner of Huffman Riley PLLC. Mr. Huffman concentrates his practice advising U.S. and foreign clients concerning the U.S. export control laws, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”); Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”); and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) regulations. DARREN RILEY is a founding member and partner of Huffman Riley PLLC. Mr. Riley has extensive experience advising clients on matters involving U.S. export controls and government contracts issues. He counsels clients on issues related to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, Export Administration Regulations, the regulations of the Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter 26 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E M on d ay, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TRACK 6: VISUAL ARTS 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320F Using HTML5 to Develop IMI, Simulations, and Games (1521) % When Simple Becomes Complicated: Using Machinima for Training and Education (1533) % TUTORIALS TRACK 5: INTERACTING WITH USERS 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320B HTML5 turns the web into an interactive multimedia platform that does not require plug-ins and can run on any device. Because of this, it has become the standard for developing web sites, web applications, mobile applications, eBooks and, most importantly for the I/ITSEC community, interactive multimedia instruction (IMI), simulations, and games. This tutorial covers the basics of HTML5, presenting the “why,” the “how,” the “so what?” and the “wow!”. This tutorial addresses the big picture issues that are important to managers and procurement personnel as well as the details of how to code in HTML5. Attendees will learn how (and why) to use HTML5 to render cross-platform multimedia, implement interactivity, optimize the user experience, add semantic tags, and create cloud-based simulations and games. All of these topics will be illustrated with live demonstrations, and the tutorial will provide pointers to HTML5 authoring tools and other resources. The tutorial will also cover recent developments in HTML5. The use of virtual technologies to visualize specific events on battlefields, both real and imagined, has become incredibly important in training the leaders of today and tomorrow. Reviewing an event visualization for specific lessons learned, both positive and negative, is far more effective than reading a 30 page after action review. With the advent of new abilities of video game engines, it is now possible to quickly create these event visualizations from a desktop computer with minimal training. However, as the events to be replicated deviate further from squad-based, traditional combat, it becomes increasingly difficult to utilize a game engine designed with artificial intelligence programmed to avoid certain conflicts, collisions, and movements. This tutorial will provide an overview of the video creation process utilized by the Training Brain Operation Center’s (TBOC) SIMS organization, with a focus on specific problems encountered by scenario developers utilizing a video game engine as the visualization tool for event recreation. This tutorial is intended for anyone interested in how a visualization request is broken down by the TBOC SIMS team Presenters ROBBY ROBSON, Ph.D., began developing web-based learning con- into component parts, evaluated for recreation, and then tent and learning management systems in 1995 and has led multiple filmed for use as a military training tool. Department of Defense and National Science Foundation projects that have applied emerging technologies to learning, education, and training. He has published extensively in areas ranging from mathematics to web-based learning and standards development. Dr. Robson chaired the IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee from 2000 to 2008 and co-founded Eduworks Corporation in 2001 where he has guided research, services, and product development and serves as CEO. He holds a doctorate in mathematics from Stanford University and has held leadership posts in both academia and industry. SHERRIE VIEIRA is a media specialist who served honorably in the U.S. Army for four years, receiving a Joint Services Achievement medal or her work at the Medina Regional SIGINT Operations Center in San Antonio, Texas. She has a BS in digital arts from the University of Oregon and has worked at Hewlett-Packard and with the State of Oregon as well as at Eduworks. Sherrie has develop a variety of HTML5 web applications and web sites and has worked on projects converting older interactive web formats to HTML5. Presenter BRIAN HALL is a former Artilleryman who spent a year in downtown Baghdad dodging indirect fire and IEDs while collecting intelligence and escorting industry officials to various Ministries. After his return and subsequent departure from the US Army, his recent experience in Iraq and computer science degree was leveraged to complement the scenario development team at TBOC SIMS. In four years there, he has developed over 60 military training videos, consisting of more than five hours of content. He also conceived, designed, and developed a virtual land navigation trainer, of which there are now 12 different terrain variants. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 27 Mo n d a y, 30 N ov e m b e r 2015 All Tutorials are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) TUTORIALS TRACK 7: NEW DIMENSIONS IN TRAINING 1430 – 1600 • ROOM S320D Team and Collective Training Needs Analysis (1537) ñ An organisation’s capability is delivered, almost without exception, by the team or set of teams that make up its structure. Effective team training is a significant precursor to the delivery of team performance at the level required for organisational success. The complexity of team training goes far beyond that of individual training as a consequence of both the complexity of the overall team task and its associated task environment, and the training delivery capability required to implement such training. Consequently, the front end analysis techniques required to identify team training requirements, specify training solutions and evaluate training options have to address these complexities. Team and Collective Training Needs Analysis (TCTNA) is a methodology that has been developed for the UK MOD specifically to address this front end analysis challenge. The purpose of this tutorial is to provide an understanding of how analysis and design concepts familiar from Instructional Systems Design have been extended within TCTNA to address the complexities of team and collective training, and to demonstrate its application by means of a Maritime Force Protection Case Study. The iterative application of TCTNA to support key stages in the acquisition process will also be discussed. This tutorial is aimed at anyone with an interest in specifying team and collective training requirements and identifying viable training solutions. Presenters JOHN HUDDLESTONE, Ph.D., is a Senior Research Fellow in the Human Systems Integration Group within the Engineering and Computing Faculty at Coventry University in England. A co-author of the Team and Collective Training Needs Analysis Methodology, his research interests include team training, human factors methods and aviation human factors. Current research projects include the human factors of future flight deck technologies and single pilot operations, and the team and collective training implications of future maritime unmanned systems concepts. He holds a Ph.D. in applied psychology from Cranfield University, a Master’s degree in Computing Science from Imperial College, London and BS in Education from Notting Trent University. JONATHAN PIKE, is a freelance learning and development consultant currently living in Perth, Western Australia. Since 2005, while working at Human Factors departments of Cranfield University and Coventry University, he has conducted research for the UK MOD under the auspices of the Human Factors Integration Defence Technology Centre and Defence Human Capability Science and Technology Centre. A visiting researcher at Coventry University, he holds a B.S. in Biology from University College London and an M.S. in Applied Computing Technology from Middlesex University. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Tutorial Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Tutorial Award ñ International Author % Game-related Subject Matter 28 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Special Events MONDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S310BCD SE1 Select Members of Congress will participate in this I/ITSEC Event S I G N AT U R E E V E N T Congressional Modeling and Simulation Event This special event invites everyone attending the conference or exposition to hear from the training and simulation leaders in congress. It is also a great opportunity for you to interact with Congressional Members on issues of importance to you or your company and to impress upon them your priorities. With defense budgets constrained, this forum provides you an opportunity to advocate for value of training and simulation in support of national security. Attendees will hear how Congressional Members see the situation in Washington and have the opportunity to make their case for timely investments in Modeling and Simulation. With every budget dollar being scrutinized, strong advocacy for training and readiness has never been more important. This event is always standing room only, so get there early. The following members of Congress have been invited to address the M&S Community at I/ITSEC: Robert Aderholt* Steve Cohen* Virginia Foxx* Jeff Miller* Jeff Sessions Alabama 4th District Tennessee 9th District Florida 1st District Alabama Gus Bilirakis* Mike Conaway* North Carolina 5th District Bill Nelson Richard Shelby Florida 12th District Texas 11th District Phil Gingrey* Florida Alabama Diane Black* John Cornyn Georgia 11th District Richard Nugent* Niki Tsongas* Tennessee 6th District Texas Richard Hanna* Florida 11th District Barbara Boxer Ander Crenshaw* Scott Peters* Massachusetts 3rd District California Florida 4th District New York 22nd District Jim Bridenstine* Ted Cruz California 52nd District Tim Walz* Duncan Hunter Minnesota 1st District Oklahoma 1st District Texas California 50th District Bill Posey* Mark Warner Mo Brooks* Susan Davis* Tim Kaine Florida 8th District Virginia Alabama 5th District California 53rd District Virginia Tom Rooney* Elizabeth Warren Corrine Brown Blake Farenthold Doug Lamborn* Florida 17th District Massachusetts Florida 5th District Texas, 7th District Colorado 5th District Marco Rubio Joe Wilson* Vern Buchanan* Dianne Feinstein Ed Markey Florida Florida 16th District California Massachusetts Ken Calvert* J. Randy Forbes* John Mica C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger* South Carolina 2nd District California 42nd District Virginia 4th District Chair, M&S Caucus Florida 7th District Maryland 2nd District Virginia 1st District Candice Miller* Bobby Scott* Michigan 10th District Virginia 3rd District *denotes members of the Congressional M&S Caucus John Carter* Robert Wittman* Texas 31st District Congressmen Scott and Mica address the audience and visit the Exhibit Floor during I/ITSEC 2014. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 29 Small Business and the Government S I G N AT U R E E V E N T MONDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 1530 - 1700 WARFIGHTERS CORNER (BOOTH 2280) SE2 DoD Small Business Programs Moderator Kenyata L. Wesley, SES Acting Director, DOD Office of Small Business Programs Office of Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 30 Mr. Wesley, SES M r. Wesley’s duties encompass multiple functional areas within the Office Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics), including Policy, Goaling and Portfolio Management; Comprehensive Subcontracting; SBIR/STTR; Commercialization; Technology and Innovation; and Acquisition Strategies. This Special Event will enlighten listeners and provide a distinct perspective on the importance of a robust and technologically agile Small Business industrial base, the Department of Defense Mentor Protégé Program, Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) / Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR), Commercialization, streamlining contracting processes, and Better Buying Power 3.0 initiatives as they relate to how the Department will continue “Forging the Future through Innovation”. Following Mr. Wesley’s presentation, the audience will be able to engage in a question and answer segment covering all small business topics of concern. The segment will also focus on the significance of developing highly skilled small business professionals empowered to contract with exceedingly capable small businesses that provide a good value to the taxpayer while also meeting warfighter requirements. 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E S I G N AT U R E E V E N T TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 HYATT REGENCY WINDERMERE BALLROOM SE3 General/Flag Officer Panel RADM Robb, USN (Ret.) Mr. DiGiovanni, SES VADM Gonzalez-Huix, ESP N VADM Moran, USN LTG Williamson, USA Maj Gen Post, USAF MajGen Lukeman, USMC Moderator Rear Admiral James A. Robb, USN (Ret.) President, National Training and Simulation Association Panelists Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) Vice Admiral Javier Gonzalez-Huix, ESP N Deputy Chief of Staff Joint Force Trainer, NATO HQ SACT Vice Admiral Bill Moran, USN Chief of Naval Personnel Lieutenant General Michael E. Williamson, USA G lobal forces are squeezed between declining budgets and expanding threats. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps have posted plans to significantly reorganize and downsize. Meanwhile, terrorist threats continue to spread across the globe. Nations are experiencing increasing pressure from immigration issues on their borders and a wave of cyber attacks from the net. Our Senior Officer panel will be challenged to address current and future environments and give perspective on how we “forge the future through innovation”. This year’s panel will include senior representatives from all the U.S. Military Services and NATO. Following opening remarks, the audience will be able to interact with the panel through written questions. Don’t miss the opportunity to hear from national leaders on the way ahead. Military Deputy/Director, Army Acquisition Corps, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) Major General James N. Post III, USAF Director, Current Operations, Headquarters Air Force Major General James W. Lukeman, USMC Commanding General, Training and Education Command Panelists address Global Defense issues during the 2014 General/Flag Officer Panel. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 31 Training Innovation: Key to Maritime Strategy TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1400 - 1530 • ROOM S330AB SE4 S I G N AT U R E E V E N T Forging the Future of Navy Training Moderator Vice Admiral Bill Moran, USN Chief of Naval Personnel Panelists VADM Moran, USN Vice Admiral Paul A. Grosklags, USN Commander, Naval Air Systems Command Acquisition for Training Rear Admiral Michael E. White, USN Naval Education and Training Command Future of Naval Training Rear Admiral Mathias W. Winter, USN Chief of Naval Research/ Director, Innovation Technology Requirements, and Test & Evaluation The Role of Research and Technology in Training and Simulation VADM Grosklags, USN RADM White, USN RADM Winter, USN T his year’s conference theme, “Forging the Future through Innovation” focuses on the ever changing landscape, and how innovation continues to be one of the key factors in our future. The United States Maritime Strategy calls for a force that is forward, engaged and ready. In times of limited budgets and force size, it’s the readiness of our personnel that will provide our continued warfighting advantage. Training sits at the very core of that readiness, and remains one of the greatest tools available to ensure our Sailors remain our greatest asymmetrical advantage. In ensuring our future force remains flexible, agile and ready, our Navy will use innovative training methods to train them more efficiently and to ever-higher levels of proficiency. The maritime strategy calls for the sea services to “create a true learning competency that unites our acquisition, requirements, and programming efforts to deliver the latest in technology and design, resulting in realistic simulation and live, virtual, and constructive scenarios before our people deploy…” It is understood that high-quality training is an investment in our people. We capitalize on this investment in training by making affordability a priority throughout the training system cycle of research, development, acquisition and sustainment. The sea services of the United States will remain critical to securing the nation’s national security objectives, and well-trained forces are critical to our Navy’s ability to meet its mission. This panel of senior Navy leaders will provide insight into how training our Sailors fits into our national maritime strategy, now and in the future, from an acquisition, research and technology and mission readiness perspective. Session Chair: Rob Matthews NAWCTSD 32 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S310BCD SE5 S I G N AT U R E E V E N T Forging the Future of Marine Corps Training Training Innovation: Preparing for the Future Naval Campaign Session Keynote General Robert B. Neller, USMC 37th Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen Neller, USMC Moderator Rear Admiral James A. Robb, USN (Ret.) President, National Training and Simulation Association Panelists Major General James W. Lukeman, USMC Commanding General, Training and Education Command Brigadier General Julian D. Alford, USMC Commanding General, Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory Brigadier General Joseph F. Shrader, USMC Commander, Marine Corps Systems Command Brigadier General Raymond R. Descheneaux, USMC Assistant Deputy Commandant for Aviation (Mobilization) RADM Robb, USN (Ret.) MajGen Lukeman, USMC BGen Alford, USMC BGen Shrader, USMC BGen Descheneaux, USMC T his year’s conference theme, “Forging the Future through Innovation” focuses on the ever changing landscape, and how innovation continues to be one of the key factors in our future. ‘Expeditionary Force XXI’ and ‘A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower’ calls for a force that is forward, engaged and ready. In times of limited budgets and force size, it’s the readiness of our personnel that will provide our continued force dominance. Training sits at the very core of that readiness, and remains one of the greatest tools available to ensure our Marines remain our greatest asymmetrical advantage. In ensuring our future force remains expeditionary, agile and ready, our Marine Corps will use innovative training methods to train them more efficiently and to ever-higher levels of proficiency. The Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower calls for the sea services to “create a true learning competency that unites our acquisition, requirements, and programming efforts to deliver the latest in technology and design, resulting in realistic simulation and live, virtual, and constructive scenarios before our people deploy…” It is understood that high-quality training is an investment in our people. We capitalize on this investment in training by making affordability a priority throughout the training system cycle of research, development, acquisition and sustainment. The sea services of the United States will remain critical to securing the nation’s national security objectives, and well-trained forces are critical to our Marine Corps ability to meet its mission. This panel of senior Marine Corps leaders will provide insight into how training our Marines fits into our national security strategy, now and in the future, from an acquisition, research and technology and mission readiness perspective. Session Chair: Martin Bushika, Director, Strategic Business Operations, PM TRASYS MARCORSYSCOM T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 33 Fostering the Cyber Mind WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S330AB SE6 S I G N AT U R E E V E N T Training the Cyber Warrior: A LearnerCentric Model Moderator Frank C. DiGiovanni Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) Panelists John Rigney Co-Founder, Chief Technology Officer, Point3 Security, Inc. Martin C. Carlisle, Ph.D. Professor of Computer Science, Director of the Academy Center for Cyberspace Research, and Coach of the Cyber Competition Team, U.S. Air Force Academy Jeff Moss Founder of Black Hat and DEF CON Conferences Brian Markus Chief Executive Officer and co‐Founder of Aries Security T he timing for this special event could be no more opportune. Although cyber remains a high priority for the DoD, our training capability for cyber is nascent and our methods and tools to train this force are still emerging. This world-class panel of cyber learning experts will share lessons from their cyber training experiences and assess the current cyber training landscape. Together, they will address critical cyber readiness issues: How can we train cyber in the right way, and what role can DoD play in taking cyber training to the next level, in partnership with academia and industry? Session Chair: Damon Regan, Ph.D. The Tolliver Group 34 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Lightning II, plugged in to LVC WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1400 - 1530 • ROOM S320GH SE7 S I G N AT U R E E V E N T F-35 Lightning II – Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) Moderator Lieutenant General Christopher C. Bogdan, USAF Program Executive Officer, Lightning II Joint Program Office Panelists Rear Admiral Michael C. Manazir, USN Director, Air Warfare (OPNAV N98) Brigadier General Raymond R. Descheneaux, USMC Assistant Deputy Commandant for Aviation (Mobilization) Major General James. N. Post III, USAF Director, Current Operations, Headquarters Air Force S ervice leaders will discuss the future of training for the F-35 including how LVC will be leveraged for increased proficiency of the aircrew. The Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force share a common vision and goal for LVC with respect to training on the F-35, where in the end state there will be no discernable differences between live and constructive adversaries beyond visual range for the F-35 pilots. Panel members will discuss the future of joint virtual and constructive distributed training from their Service perspectives. Key near-term LVC objectives to be discussed include: • F-35 integration with distributed training networks • Future LVC systems integration of USMC-USN-USAF fourth and fifth generation aircraft • Challenges and benefits of incorporating live training into joint, virtual and constructive training networks. While the path to achieve the goal is not pre-determined, integration of efforts and collaboration on initiatives are paramount to achieving LVC success for not only the F-35 but also for legacy and future advanced weapons platforms. Session Chair: Lewis Harris Booz|Allen|Hamilton T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 35 WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1600 - 1730 • ROOM S330AB SE8 Attendees at this event may earn CEU credits. S I G N AT U R E E V E N T I/ITSEC Fellows I/ITSEC 2015 Fellow Duncan (Duke) Miller, Ph.D. I/ITSEC Fellows is an annual series of presentations by technical leaders responsible for the seminal contributions that have fundamentally shaped the simulation and training capabilities being delivered today. The paper authored by Duncan (Duke) Miller, Ph.D. may be found on the 2015 Proceedings CD provided to conference attendees. The abstract of his paper is also included in this Program Guide as part of the 2015 I/ITSEC Abstract Section. D r. Duncan (Duke) Miller has been a key figure in the development of distributed simulation for 30 years. In 1983, he formed and led the development of the SIMNET system and protocols. He chaired the Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) Technical Committee that developed the DIS Standards, and served on the government/FFRDC team that developed the High Level Architecture (HLA). He was a founding member of the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO), where he served as Chair of SISO’s Board of Directors, Chair of SISO’s Conference Committee, and as a member of SISO’s Executive Committee. From 2001-2012, he was SISO’s Executive Director. In this presentation, Dr. Miller provides a unique perspective on how distributed simulation was conceived and developed, including major milestones, tests, and demonstrations. He offers anecdotes and insights regarding key events and individuals, as well as comments on subsequent developments. Key quotes from “SIMNET and Beyond: A History of the Development of Distributed Simulation”: “The core concept of SIMNET was the networking of multiple simulators, with each simulator providing its own controls, displays, and computational resources. No central control system scheduled events or resolved interactions among the simulation nodes. Instead, each node was autonomous, maintaining authoritative status for one simulated entity (e.g., a tank, helicopter, or missile system) and transmitting messages about the state and actions of its simulated entity to other nodes on a peer-to-peer basis. Each node was also responsible for receiving, interpreting, and responding to messages regarding events that might affect its own entity (e.g., a missile impact, an exploding mine, a collision, etc.) and for reporting any resulting changes in its entity’s state (e.g., damaged, destroyed, or unaffected.)” “In 1985, the Undersecretary of the Army agreed to redirect funding to DARPA to support SIMNET development, “Because if you can do what you’re telling me, it will change the way the Army manages its weapon systems procurement.” And in many respects, it has. In 1991, a study of various DARPA initiatives by the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies listed SIMNET as one of six programs that have had the most profound effects on the DoD.” “The SIMNET protocols were the foundation for the Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) protocols, which were used for the Army’s Close Combat Tactical Trainer (CCTT), Aviation Combined Arms Tactical Trainer (AVCATT), and subsequent procurements. DIS, in turn, was a primary source for the High Level Architecture (HLA).” Session Chair: Robert Lutz The Johns Hopkins University/ Applied Physics Laboratory 36 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S330AB SE9 Moderator Garth Jensen Director of Innovation, Naval Surface Warfare Center Panelists David Earnest, Ph.D. Professor of Political Science and International Studies, Old Dominion University Kira Hutchinson TRADOC Intelligence Support Activity (TRISA) Rebecca Law Faculty Research Associate, Naval Postgraduate School WHAT IS A BLACK SWAN? A Black Swan event refers to a high impact/low probability event. It is an occurrence that is very difficult to predict, and carries a massive impact. Throughout history, these events, both good and bad, have had a substantial impact on individual organizations, entire industries, nations, or populations on a global scale. Black Swan is typically associated with the phrases “That will never happen”, “That can never be done”, “No one would ever do that” or “What if?” Because they will never happen we assume away their risk or potential value. Are they truly unpredictable? S I G N AT U R E E V E N T Black Swan – Setting the Stage Join Us for the I/ITSEC Black Swan KICKOFF! WHY BLACK SWAN AT I/ITSEC? We rarely take time to try to imagine the unimaginable. Why spend time studying something that will never happen? Why should we spend time and resources attempting to conceptualize and plan for something that will never happen? The answer is obvious — They do happen! The significance of Black Swan to I/ITSEC is that you can’t study the effects of a Black Swan in reality — you have to do it in Simulation and Simulation is what we do best. WHAT WILL WE TALK ABOUT? This inaugural Black Swan event is the start of a multi-year effort to highlight the value of Modeling, Simulation and Analysis in the study of Black Swan scenarios. This event will bring together a panel of globally recognized experts that will focus on the following topics: • What is a Black Swan? • What entities and organizations are thinking in the Black Swan space? • How do these organizations frame their thinking and analysis of Black Swans? • How do we prepare, organize, train and equip for Black Swan resiliency? • How can Modeling and Simulation be used to analyze and prepare or create a Black Swan? • Can we develop complex adaptive models and simulations tools that will enable the analysis? RELATED EVENTS THIS WEEK • Operation Blended Warrior, the LVC demo on the show floor will be set off by a Black Swan scenario. Events all week — see OBW flyer. • Technology Innovation Poster Session and Demonstration — highlighting M&S capabilities and techniques that foster future research and development in the Black Swan domain Wednesday • Training Adaptive Leaders for a Black Swan World — Thursday at 1030 Session Chair: Anne Little, Ph.D. Addx Corporation T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 37 Thriving in Uncertainty THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S330AB SE10 S I G N AT U R E E V E N T Training Adaptive Leaders for a Black Swan World Moderator Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) Panelists LTG Robert B. Brown, USA Commanding General, U.S. Army Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth Meir Finkel, Ph.D. Commander of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) Dado Center on Interdisciplinary Military Studies, retired IDF Brigadier General MG Karl L. E. Engelbrektson Head of Training and Education, Swedish Armed Forces I s the world actually getting more complex, or are we just getting bombarded with more information? There is no simple answer. However, with the world’s increasing interconnectedness, we do know one thing. There is a growing awareness (in the military and elsewhere) of a meteoric rise in potential “Black Swan” challenges and events that are difficult to predict. How to prepare for this? This Signature Event will focus on the critical human dimension — the importance of training and developing truly adaptive leaders, able to challenge the status quo and embrace innovation. The event features a diverse panel of top experts. Expect a wide-open discussion that will apply to the future of military training, business industry practices, academic research, and learning how to thrive in ambiguous environments. This panel builds upon the earlier Black Swan Signature Event as well as I/ITSEC’s new Operation Blended Warrior floor activity. Session Chair: Randy Crowe, Ph.D. Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training 38 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E MONDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 1430 - 1600 DISASTER STRIKES Addressing 23 Years of LVC Status Quo FLOOR EVENT TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1530 - 1700 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 COUNTERING EXPLOITATION WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1600 - 1730 SECURING THE SKIES THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 OVERMATCH: FORWARD FROM THE SEA BOOTH 339 AND OTHER FLOOR LOCATIONS FL1 Operation Blended Warrior (OBW) I n this Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) Special Event, industry members and government organizations are joining forces to create an LVC environment for the purpose of: 1) showcasing their capabilities, and 2) collecting data on challenges encountered during their efforts. The relative effort to establish an LVC event versus the benefit of, or the effort to conduct the LVC event is out of kilter; the former takes considerably more time and effort, and too little is being done to address this discrepancy. This year, Operation Blended Warrior will provide attendees with glimpses of the state of LVC capabilities constrained to I/ITSEC confines, as well as insights into the number, degree and priority of challenges encountered. This year’s concentration is on standards, after action review, and traditional LVC and cyber-contested environments using a Black Swan (humanitarian assistance) event as a backdrop. In future years, additional complexities and concentrations will be added to the event construct — both to showcase additional capabilities, and to tease out additional challenges that need to be addressed. BY WORKING TOGETHER, NTSA, INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL BELIEVE SOLUTIONS CAN BE FOUND TO IMPROVE THE CREATION AND EXECUTION OF LVC EVENTS. Check your Meeting Bags or stop by Booth 339 for a full listing of the participants and the programs to be demonstrated. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 39 From the Tip of the Spear: Joint Warfighter Panels TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1530 - 1700 • BOOTH 2280 FLOOR EVENT WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • BOOTH 2280 THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • BOOTH 2280 FL2 Warfighters Corner: From the Tip of the Spear A s combat operations in the Middle East diminish, our warfighters are expected to perform around the globe without hesitation. In recognition of their service, Warfighters Corner: From the Tip of the Spear provides an opportunity to meet and thank the warfighters and to hear about their personal experiences on recent deployments. Warfighters Corner: From the Tip of the Spear presents multiple events during the conference featuring service men and women. These Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen derive great benefit from I/ITSEC and the organizations and industries that support the conference. Many of the speakers have served multiple tours and will be sharing their stories; their personal experiences; and their views of what was, or was not effective in terms of the training they received prior to deployment. All From the Tip of the Spear sessions will include representatives from each of the Services. The presenters will discuss operations and also provide insights into the role of Allies, international organizations and private organizations in theater. You’ll hear first hand how your products and services have enhanced warfighter combat readiness. The Wednesday morning session will be attended by veterans groups from the local Central Florida area. The audience listens intently to the presenters from Warfighters Corner 2014. 40 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Blending Live and Synthetic is Reality TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1400 - 1530 • ROOM S320GH FE1 FOCUS EVENT Live/Synthetic Blended Training: From Home Station Environment to Battlespace Execution Moderator Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) Panelists Col Patrick Kline, USMC MARFORCOM LtCol Troy Havener, USAF LVC LNO, U.S. Air National Guard COL Craig S. Unrath, USA Director, National Simulation Center, U.S. Army Combined Arms Center Stuart Bullard Aviator, Producer, and Founder, Unmanned Autonomous Vehicle System Association (UAVSA) Chip Carpenter Simulation Engineer, U.S. Navy Fleet Forces Command O ur force of the future will expect a realistic and blended environment. Their training must be demanding and challenging enough to give them success in complex and ambiguous 21st century environments. Technological advantage is giving way to the need for training superiority in order to win the wars of the future. Future training capabilities must provide that realistic Live/Synthetic Blended Training environment. Live/Synthetic Blended Training is important for three reasons: • With deployments coming to an end, budgets decreasing, and home station training increasing, the training the warfighter receives must be realistic and relevant to prepare for combat operations. • Demand on, and expectations of, training technologies will only increase. Future training must seamlessly blend live and synthetic environments in order to maximize the training outcomes. • There is an implied shift away from winning with better technology to winning through better training and preparation. This panel will discuss the ways and means of how existing and emerging technologies can provide a blend of live and synthetic capability. The panel session will close with a question and answer period that will give the audience an opportunity to provide their thoughts about the state of Live/Synthetic Blended Training and possible avenues for advancement. Session Chair: Brian Holmes The AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 41 WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S320GH FE2 Medical Simulation Across the Services FOCUS EVENT Medical Simulation and Training: A Joint Endeavor Moderator M. Beth H. Pettitt Chief, Medical Simulation Research Branch, ARL HRED STTC Panelists Col Meletios Fotinos, USAF, M.D. Chief, Medical Modernization, Office of the Command Surgeon, AETC COL Daniel Irizarry, USA, M.D. U.S. Army PEO STRI Medical Advisor, JPO Medical Simulation Kevin Kunkler, M.D. Chair Medical Simulation and Training, Joint Program Committee-1 Jack Norfleet Chief Engineer, Medical Simulation Research Branch, ARL HRED STTC Ray Perez, Ph.D. Program Officer, Human & Bioengineered Systems Division, Warfighter Performance Department, Office of Naval Research M edical simulation and training is a growing field in both the military and civilian sectors. Improvements in medical training technology enable more effective caregivers, and ultimately results in improved patient outcomes. The adoption of medical simulation has rapidly grown over the past decade, in medical schools, residency programs, nursing, EMS training, Combat Medics/Corpsman Training, and first responder training. Over the past 5-10 years, there has been a huge endeavor to create a Joint Medical Simulation and Training community within the Department of Defense. The commonalities in medical care across the Services allow for significant collaboration and cost-savings by combining resources and leveraging research. The Defense Health Agency has provided funding to support the joint medical infrastructure as well as research and development across this emerging community. This panel will showcase the successes of this Joint endeavor and highlight its future direction. The discussions will cover current research objectives across the Services, and future technological challenges facing the medical simulation community. The research discussion will include both near term and long term research goals. The acquisition discussion will address current programs, highlight transition of R&D into acquisition, and lifecycle sustainment related to medical modeling and simulation. The joint community discussion will speak to the creation of requirements, the progress made towards creating a cohesive medical simulation community, and the challenges encountered along the way. The panel represents a broad segment of the Services, and has representatives involved in diverse phases of the acquisition lifecycle — requirements generation, technology development, and fielding. The event provides excellent background to the joint nature of medical simulation and training, and can help facilitate coordination among academia, industry, and the appropriate Service(s). Additionally, the program provides the near and far term vision of joint medical training within the DoD. The audience does not need to have any medical simulation background to benefit from this panel session. The intended audience is anyone with an interest in the progress and future vision for joint medical training, including engineers, scientists, business development, corporate executives, and Service members. Session Chair: Mike Flanagan CACI-Federal 42 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E INDUSTRY AND EXERCISES How can business learn from NATO exercises? WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1400 - 1530 • ROOM S330C FE3 Moderator Wayne Buck Allied Command Transformation, I3X Panelists Wayne Fujito Past Chairman NATO Industrial Advisory Group (Invited) Jean-Pierre Faye Thales Raytheon Systems FOCUS EVENT Industry Involvement Initiative for NATO Exercises ñ N ATO completed Exercise Trident Juncture (TRJE 15), the largest NATO exercise since the Cold War in November of this year. TRJE 15 brought together 36,000 troops, 200 aircraft, and 75 ships performing maneuver warfare, amphibious assault and other large-scale combat training events. The NATO exercise program is the centerpiece of the NATO training strategy but also provides an opportunity for Commanders to be imaginative and innovative and further develop requirements to meet future challenges. This year, the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) started a program for industry called Industry Involvement Initiative for NATO Exercises (I3X). The aim of this new initiative is to welcome and encourage innovation by allowing industry to have a much better foundational understanding of how NATO exercises are initiated, planned, executed, evaluated and used to prepare for operations. Industry participation further contributes to aligning industry research and development efforts with emerging NATO requirements. For TRJE 1, industry visitors from 51 companies were embedded in the Computer Assisted Exercises (CAX) and Live Exercises where they received special briefings, participated in facilitated sessions, received training, got qualitative comments from field users and bettered understand operational requirements. This special event panel is made up of NATO, national government, and industry participants who will discuss the lessons learned, benefits and challenges of NATO efforts to engage industry inside the exercise planning and execution cycle. Come hear what industry learned from this rare and valuable window into the war fighting experience. Steve Joyce Pulau Corporation Gonzalo Arechaga Thales Programas de Electrónica y Communicaciones (Invited) Session Chair: K. Denise Threlfall, Ph.D. Kratos Defense & Security Solutions T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 43 WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1600 - 1730 • ROOM S320GH FE4 FOCUS EVENT The Serious Games Showcase & Challenge (SGS&C) The Next 10 Years of Forging the Future Through Innovation Moderator Lisa Scott Holt, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist, Intelligent Automation, Inc. & SGS&C 2015 Event Lead Panelists Joe Kreiner Head of Engine Licensing in the Western Hemisphere, Epic Games Mike Macedonia, Ph.D. Assistant Vice President for Research and Innovation, University of Central Florida Russell Shilling, Ph.D. Executive Director of STEM, US Department of Education David Martz President, BroadReach Education Michael D. Armbruster, Ed.D. Senior Executive Director, Career and Technical Education, Orange County Public Schools A s the SGS&C celebrates its 10-year anniversary, we look back to understand the impact that serious games have had thus far, and more importantly, we look forward at the huge potential that lies ahead. This SGS&C Special Event reflects on the current and future impact of serious games, and provides the opportunity to learn from, and interact with experts in the field. This special event begins when exhibits open with a Serious Game Hunt on the exhibit floor for all I/ITSEC registrants and culminates with this lively, expert panel discussion. SGS&C is focused on showcasing games that are used for learning or training, and the annual Challenge has played an important role in advancing the genre. Thought leaders from the serious game industry and government organizations will share their perspectives on the last 10 years and the future of serious games. The panel will explore the impact of serious games on workforce education, STEM education, and the simulation community. This event will be accented with gameplay video segments from past SGS&C finalists. Don’t miss this once in a lifetime event! The Serious Games Hunt kicks off the 10th Anniversary on the exhibit floor with an engaging and fun introduction to the many different uses of serious games and gaming technology in the training, simulation and education community. The I/ITSEC floor is open season where participants are invited to “shoot out” targets on a Hunt card by engaging with serious game developers and consumers on the exhibit floor to collect special stamps from designated exhibitors. The Hunt culminates at this expert panel discussion where a prize will be awarded to one lucky Game Hunter (with a complete target card). The Game Hunter must be present to win. Look for details in your I/ITSEC bag. Session Chair: Randy Jensen Stottler Henke Associates, Inc. 44 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Enlighten Us, But Make It Quick! THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S330C FE5 FOCUS EVENT IGNITE! Moderator John H. Aughey The Boeing Company C ome and hear industry experts speak on topics such as non-traditional agile, serious games, cognitive biases, and more. Have you ever sat through a long presentation and lamented that there were only five minutes of content? Imagine if you could hear only that five minutes of targeted, compelling, and maybe even provocative content... that’s Ignite! Ignite is a presentation format that allows dynamic, high octane speakers a platform to share their passion and ideas. I/ITSEC’s version of Ignite focuses on topics that are relevant and thought-provoking, and which embody this year’s theme of “Forging the Future Through Innovation.” So bring your short attention span and prepare to be inspired, entertained, educated and amazed by an array of talented speakers. Seven presenters have been selected from over 30 nominations, and each talk is jam-packed with inspiration and information using 20 slides that auto-advance every 15 seconds, creating a fun and dynamic event. Speakers Pete Morrison Brian Simpson Brandt Dargue Bohemia Interactive Simulation, Inc. Subject: Gaming Supercharges Military Training Q4 Services, LLC Subject: High Performance Collimated Optical Displays for Simulation The Boeing Company Subject: Fun, Fast, and Unforgettable Learning Experiences Bill Reuter Al Brannan R-Squared Solutions, LLC Subject: Leadership from the Flight Deck CAE USA, Inc. Subject: Cybersecurity Anne Little, Ph.D. Addx Corporation Subject: Unconventional Agile Lisa Scott Holt, Ph.D. Stu Armstrong QinetiQ Training and Simulation, Inc. Subject: 2025 – A look BACK over the last 10 years Intelligent Automation, Inc. Subject: Serious Games Session Chair: Denny Shockley Motion Analysis Corporation T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 45 THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S320GH FE-6 Visual Computing – Cloud to Virtual Reality FOCUS EVENT Visual Computing Moderator Doug Traill Principal Engineer, NVIDIA Panelists Douglas Maxwell Science and Technology Manager, Virtual World Strategic Applications, U.S. Army Research Lab Tim Woodard CTO, Diamond Visionics Matt Tovey Training and Simulation Systems Programme UK Ministry of Defence One of these images is a photograph, the other is a computer rendering using physically-based rendering techniques. (Image courtesy of NVIDIA) Real-time image generation from different data sources. (Image courtesy of Diamonod Visionics) V isual computing refers to the rising importance of GPUs (Graphical Processor Units) to the generation of visual simulation — not only in creating the visuals but increasingly influencing how databases are created and training is deployed. The event will include a panel of experts from the computer graphics and visualization industry as well as the training community related to these challenges. This event focuses on three challenges to the visual simulation community: Realistic Visuals — How does new technology enable more photo-realistic visualization to support immersive and VR training? The first challenge, photo-realistic visualization, is about suspending disbelief and getting the warfighter to believe they are immersed within a training exercise. However, photo-realism is not only computationally extensive, it takes a long time to render a realistic image and it is reliant on the skill of the programmer or artist who generates the database. This event will explore the concept of physically-based rendering which uses scanned materials to create photo-realistic images. Data on-the-fly — What are the opportunities for automatically generating visual databases “on the fly” to provide timely training material? The second challenge being discussed is the time it takes to generate a 3D database. Typically, this development targets specific runtimes or Image Generators that require the database to be processed in intermediate steps. Even with open database standards this approach leads to proprietary datasets. One method to overcome this is to compute the database in real-time utilizing the power of today’s modern computing platforms. Some Image Generation platforms already do this and will be discussed in this event. osted in the cloud? — Does this provide for more robust deployment of training in the cloud H so visual training can be utilized anywhere? The last challenge to be discussed includes the numerous advances in the technologies relating to cloud gaming, virtualized desktop infrastructures and training as a service that have occurred over the past 3 years. These advances have the potential to revolutionize how training is delivered to the warfighter. This event will discuss the current and future state of cloud technology, lessons learned from current deployments, lessons from other industries and future research. Session Chair: Klainie Nedoroscik Camber Corporation 46 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E DATES & TIMES LISTED BELOW BOOTH 2280 (WARFIGHTERS CORNER) COI2 PEO STRI to Provide TSIS Updates at I/ITSEC Session Chair: Traci Jones, U.S. Army PEO STRI The U.S. Army Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) will offer updates to the business opportunities portion of the annual Training and Simulation Industry Symposium (TSIS). The briefings will occur in the Warfighters Corner as follows: TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER • 1300 - 1330 COL Bill Canaley, USA, Director for Field Operations TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER • 1330 - 1400 COL Vince Malone, USA, Project Manager for Training Devices (PM TRADE) TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER • 1400 - 1430 Joe Giunta, Army Contracting Command-Orlando WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER • 1300 - 1330 COL Rich Haggerty, USA, Project Manager for Instrumentation, Targets and Threat Simulators (PM ITTS) WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER • 1330 - 1400 COL Ron Gaddy, USA, Project Manager for Integrated Training Environment (PM ITE) WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER • 1400-1430 Dale Whittaker, Director of International Programs Office (IPO) TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1530 - 1700 • ROOM S320GH COI3 Air Force Acquisition Update Session Chair: Anthony DalSasso, Air Force Materiel Command Presenters COMMUNITY OF INTEREST Discover Teaming Opportunities for International Industry and International GovernWEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER ment/Military organizations 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S310A to solve needs common with COI1 U.S. DoD. Sign up for one-onInternational one meetings with program principals to discuss your Outreach ñ technology interests in or poSession Chair: Cathy tential cooperative programs Matthews, Matthews at http://www.iitsec.org/attendees/ Systems Engineering, Inc. Pages/InternationalAttendees.aspx Both the Monday and Wednesday sessions will discuss the following topics: International Industry Opportunities with the Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT) Program will be presented by Col Scott Wallace, USAF, OSD Director for the Comparative Technology Office. • Electro-magnetic Spectrum (EMS) Agility • Autonomous Systems • Space Capability Resilience • Asymmetric Force Application Government-to-Government opportunities in cooperative research and development programs will be presented by Col Mike Malley, USAF, OSD Director, Coalition Warfare Program. • Address strategic technology gaps for current and future missions • Develop interoperability solutions for coalition operations • Strengthen current defense partnerships and developing new relationships through research and development MONDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 1430 - 1600 • ROOM S310A Lynda Rutledge, SES, Program Executive Officer and Director for the Agile Combat Support, AF Materiel Command; Col Daniel Marticello, USAF, Chief, Simulators Division, AF Materiel Command This Special Event will provide the latest information from the Air Force regarding acquisition policy and upcoming training system acquisition actions. It will feature remarks by Ms. Rutledge, the Air Force Program Executive Officer for Agile Combat Support, who will share her perspective on the current state of the Air Force acquisition process and ongoing initiatives, as they apply to the I/ITSEC community. This will be followed by a presentation by Col Marticello, the Chief of the Simulators Division. He will provide an update on Air Force simulator business opportunities, as a follow-on to the Simulation and Training Community Forum (STCF) held earlier this year. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S330C COI4 Asia Pacific Simulation Alliance: Advances in Healthcare and Emergency Management Simulation ñ Session Chair: Jim Godwin, The Tolliver Group, Inc. Presenter Alisha Fisher, Founder and Director, Asia Pacific Simulation Alliance This event will focus on the unique possibilities of simulation to increase productivity and improve health outcomes across the region. It will showcase key industry developments and thought leaders to discuss the impact these advances will have on our jobs, our economy, our education and our well-being. Who is the Asia Pacific Simulation Alliance? The Asia Pacific Simulation Alliance provides an international platform to bring together simulation users, developers, researchers and government to share, learn and collaborate. Our purpose is to provide a forum to fulfill three main objectives: 1. For users of simulation to share research, simulation technologies and experience 2. For simulation developers to promote their latest technologies and also share latest research and development 3. For users and developers to engage together in a rich dialogue to further advance simulation as an enabler across a wide range of industry sectors T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 47 Why attend? COMMUNITY OF INTEREST The purpose of this event is WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER to highlight the importance Healthcare systems across the Asia Pacific region, along with 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S330C of standards in modeling and the rest of the world, are experiencing a period of significant COI6 simulation across Europe. change as the pressure grows to train more healthcare proETSA/SISO Briefing: Of particular focus will be fessionals, at a lower cost, whilst at the same time providing defense budget constraints state of the art training programs and facilities. International M&S which are making reusability Simulation technologies are seen as key enablers in the Standards ñ and interoperability in Simudrive to increase productivity and achieve improved health Session Chair: Robert lation and Training essential. outcomes across the region. Hester, Ph.D., University of European Training and SimWe invite you to join us to hear about developments across Mississippi Medical Center ulation Association (ETSA), the Healthcare and Emergency Management sector where simulation technologies are being embraced to improve the train- which has an agreement with the Simulation Interoperability ing of the healthcare workforce and address issues around Standards Organization (SISO) to support each other across Europe, can be seen as leading in an important, money savpatient safety, within a fiscally responsible environment. ing, technology area. The presentations will not be detailed explanations of any particular standard, but will illustrate Who should attend? This meeting is aimed at those working in the following or- what standards are doing for NATO and in individual nations and how SISO standards are supporting the way forward unganisations: der tight defense budgets. • Government Departments • Health Services Moderator • Public Hospitals WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER • Private Hospitals RADM James Robb, USN 1200 - 1730 • ROOM S230D • Universities and other healthcare training providers (Ret.), National Training and COI7 • Medical Device Suppliers and Management Companies Simulation Association Whether you be a healthcare provider or educator; an academic or technician; a CEO, Chief Medical Director or Director of Nursing; this meeting will have something for you. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 0900 - 1730 • ROOM S330D COI5 ADL Virtual World Sandbox PlugFest: Hands-on Activity Moderator Robert Chadwick, ADL Initiative Attention game and simulation developers, decision makers, and instructional technology designers—this activity is Session Chair: Rolando for you! Paredes, ADL Initiative The Virtual World Sandbox lets you collaboratively author and deploy 2D/3D simulations and games via any internet connection—with absolutely no software installation required. The Sandbox comes with a large library of 3D models, embedded physics, and extendable behavior scripts. Plus, simulations made with it support robust human performance assessment and integrate seamlessly with xAPI. At this activity, participants will explore the Sandbox from a multi-user perspective, learn to author a 3D game environment from the Sandbox’s open-source library, and leave with a new tool to enhance your organization’s training and education. This activity is intended for anyone from semi-technical instructional designers to seasoned software developers. The first 45 minutes will describe the Sandbox’s purpose, value, and use (and decision makers are encouraged to attend this portion). The rest of the activity will involve hands-on work in the Sandbox. If you know the basics of JavaScript, you can become an expert game developer with this open-license tool. So, bring your laptop and start building! 48 I/ITSEC Energy Forum Join the President of NTSA at roundtable discussions where leaders from the energy sector will discuss power plant operations, safety and training requirements. Industry and Academia will showcase and discuss the latest solutions. 1200-1730: Demonstrations 1330-1500: I/ITSEC Energy Roundtable (Energy Companies’ requirements) 1530-1700: Simulation Solutions (Simulation industry’s solutions) Session Chair: Catherine Emerick, QinetiQ Training and Simulation, Inc. Invited participants include representatives from Duke Power and Dominion Power, with industry being represented by TRAX Corporation, L-3 MAPPS, Areva North America, ABB, Central Virginia Community College, Lockheed Martin and SAAB Security. Companies will also have demonstrations running in the room from 1200 to 1730. 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Hiring America’s Service Members: DoD SkillBridge Forum Moderator Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES, Director, Force Readiness and Training, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) Presenters Bruce Sobczak, Director, Workforce Development for Session Chair: Elaine the Commonwealth Center Raybourn, Ph.D., Sandia for Advanced Manufacturing National Laboratories, ADL Initiative (CCAM); Mick Yauger, Chicago Teamster 786, Teamsters Military Assistance Program, Vietnam Veteran; Elizabeth Murray-Belcaster, International Brotherhood of Teamsters Consultant, Building Materials & Construction Trade Division; Amy J. Moorash, Division Chief, U.S. Army Continuing Education System; Tim Thorne, CEO, ABF Freight Each year, over 250,000 Service members transition out of the military. Many seek employment in the civilian workforce. The new DoD SkillBridge initiative allows eligible transitioning Service members to participate in job skills training, including apprenticeships and internships, starting up to the last six months of their active duty. Join us for this I/ITSEC forum featuring a town hall with DoD SkillBridge program managers, training providers, Service members, and Veterans who will discuss how DoD SkillBridge offers training opportunities in a range of professions and industries. Whether you are a Service member or a potential training provider, you will learn firsthand how to get involved. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 0830 - 1000 • ROOM S330D COI9 Presenters Dan Visone, Army Geospatial Center (AGC); Shun Steward, USAF AFLCMC Air Force Geospatial Common Dataset (AFCD); Environmental Frank Rhinesmith, PEO STRI Synthetic Environment (SE) Database CORE; Earl Miller, SOCOM Standards Forum Common DataBase (CDB); Session Chair: Tom Rob Cox, PEO STRI Yanoschik, SAIC Enterprise Data Services (EDS); Bruce Riner, NAWCTSD NAVAIR Portable Source Initiative (NPSI) THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S330C COI10 Navy Vision: From the Training Systems Program Manager’s Perspective Moderator Rob Matthews, NAWCTSD Deputy Technical Director COMMUNITY OF INTEREST WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 1600 - 1730 • BOOTH 2280 (WARFIGHTERS CORNER) COI8 Presenters CAPT Wes Naylor, Commanding Officer, Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWCTSD); CAPT Craig Dorrans, Program Manager, Session Chair: Diana Teel, Naval Aviation Training NAWCTSD Systems (PMA-205); CAPT Jeffrey Sinclair, Program Manager, Naval Surface Training Systems (PMS-339); Jimmy Lee, Program Manager, Undersea Training Systems (07TR) Each year at I/ITSEC, a panel of Navy Captains and senior civilian leaders representing the Navy’s training acquisition organizations convenes to discuss the year’s highlights and share their strategic vision. I/ITSEC participants are welcome and encouraged to attend to hear about the state of the Navy’s training systems. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 • ROOM S330D COI11 Presenters Curtiss Murphy, Technical Director, Alion Science; Talib Hussain, Senior Scientist, Design of Learning BBN Raytheon Technologies; Michael Pillitiere, Lead Artist/ Games Designer, ICF International; Clint Little, Director of Interactive Development, Security Mentor; Vance Souders, Producer, JANUS Research This is the sixth workshop held by the multi-disciplinary Design of Learning Games Community of Practice. This 90-minute workshop provides the opportunity for serious games practitioners to meet and discuss key research and development issues and guidelines. We encourage instructional system designers, game designers, and simulation developers, program managers to attend and contribute your thoughts, methods and concerns to our discussions. The workshop will cover several topics of current research and development interest. For each topic, a short introduction of current issues and approaches will be presented by a facilitator from the community, followed by a longer group discussion among all workshop participants. This forum provides a unique opportunity for the Components’ geospatial database producers to meet with leaders in geospatial standardization, and geospatial dataset consumers and suppliers to discuss goals and challenges. Emerging technology, standards and services to reduce data production times to empower the agile force will be explored. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 49 I N T E R N AT I O N A L P R O G R A M S INTERNATIONAL ATTENDEES - INTERNATIONALE TEILNEHMER - LES PARTICIPANTS INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL DELTAKERE - INTERNATIONELL DELTAGARE - INTERNATIONAL DEELNEMERS International Pavilion Room S310E-H International attendees can meet and connect with counterparts from around the world. Limited private meeting space is available on a first-come, first-served basis to our international participants and may be scheduled at the International Pavilion’s Welcome Desk. Additional information about the many international activities throughout I/ITSEC are readily available in the International Pavilion. Sponsored by AVT Simulation. International Registrants should register at the dedicated International Check-in station positioned near the Main Registration Desk in S220 of the South Concourse. International Conference Attendees’ Meeting Bags will be available for pick-up at the Welcome Desk in the International Pavilion. More information specific to international attendees will be available at that location. International Pavilion Hours of Operation Sunday, 29 November 1400-1800 Monday, 30 November 0800-1800 Tuesday, 1 December 1030-1800 Wednesday, 2 December 0800-1500 Thursday, 3 December 0800-1500 Program Notes of Special Interest for International Attendees Papers Explore your Program for the ñ indicating Papers from International Authors. Tutorials Monday, 1 December • Room S320C • 0830 – 1000 Introduction to HLA Monday 1 December • Room S320B • 1245 – 1415 Speech-based Interaction: Myths, Challenges and Opportunities Monday 1 December • Room S320D • 1430 – 1600 Team and Collective Training Needs Analysis Events Wednesday, 2 December • Room S210D • 0830 – 1000 Best Papers from Around The Globe SimTecT Best Paper Col Lorna Swinyard, British Army, Director of Training Development, Directorate of Training Procurement (Strategy to Deliver) Critique & Lessons ITEC Best Paper Amanda Davies, Ph.D., School of Policing, Charles Stuart University Reflecting and Gaining Wisdom: Self-Assessment Rubric Model for Optimising Simulation Based Learning 50 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E I N T E R N AT I O N A L P R O G R A M S INTERNATIONAL ATTENDEES - INTERNATIONALE TEILNEHMER - LES PARTICIPANTS INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL DELTAKERE - INTERNATIONELL DELTAGARE - INTERNATIONAL DEELNEMERS SIGNATURE EVENT Thursday, 3 December • Room S330AB • 1030 – 1200 Training Adaptive Leaders for a Black Swan World COMMUNITY OF INTEREST EVENTS Monday, 30 November • Room S310A • 1430 – 1600 Wednesday, 2 December • Room S310A • 0830 – 1000 (See page 37 for more information) International Outreach Is the world actually getting more complex, or are we just bombarded with information? There is no simple answer. However, with the world’s increasing interconnectedness, we do know one thing. There is a growing awareness (in the military and elsewhere) of a meteoric rise in potential “Black Swan” challenges and events that are difficult to predict. How to prepare for this? The event features a diverse panel of top experts. Expect a wide-open discussion that will apply to the future of military training, business industry practices, academic research, and be of particular value to those with an interest in preparing for unknown threats. This panel builds upon the earlier Black Swan Signature Event as well as I/ITSEC’s new Operation Blended Warrior floor activity. (See page 46 for more information) FOCUS EVENT Wednesday, 2 December • Room S330C • 1400 – 1530 Wednesday, 2 December • Room S330C • 0830 – 1000 Industry Involvement Initiative for NATO Exercises Asia Pacific Simulation Alliance: Advances in Healthcare and Emergency Management Simulation (See page 42 for more information) (See page 46 for more information) NATO completed Exercise Trident Juncture (TRJE 15), the largest NATO exercise since the Cold War in November of this year. TRJE 15 brought together 36,000 troops, 200 aircraft, and 75 ships performing maneuver warfare, amphibious assault and other largescale combat training events. The NATO exercise program is the centerpiece of the NATO training strategy but also provides an opportunity for Commanders to be imaginative and innovative and further develop requirements to meet future challenges. This year, the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) started a program for industry called Industry Involvement Initiative for NATO Exercises (I3X). The aim of this new initiative is to welcome and encourage innovation by allowing industry to have a much better foundational understanding of how NATO exercises are initiated, planned, executed, evaluated and used to prepare for operations. Industry participation further contributes to aligning industry research and development efforts with emerging NATO requirements. This special event is panel made up of NATO, national government, and industry participants who will discuss the lessons learned, benefits and challenges of NATO efforts to engage industry inside the exercise planning and execution cycle. Come hear what industry learned from this rare and valuable window into the war fighting experience. This event will focus on the unique possibilities of simulation to increase productivity and improve health outcomes across the region. It will showcase key industry developments and thought leaders to discuss the impact these advances will have on our jobs, our economy, our education and our well-being. Healthcare systems across the Asia Pacific region, along with the rest of the world, are experiencing a period of significant change as the pressure grows to train more healthcare professionals, at a lower cost, whilst at the same time providing state of the art training programs and facilities. Simulation technologies are seen as key enablers in the drive to increase productivity and achieve improved health outcomes across the region. Discover Teaming Opportunities for International Industry and International Government/Military organizations to solve needs common with U.S. DoD. Sign up for one-on-one meetings with program principals to discuss your technology interests in or potential cooperative programs at http://www.iitsec.org/attendees/Pages/InternationalAttendees.aspx International Industry Opportunities with the Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT) Program will be presented by Col Scott Wallace, USAF, OSD Director for the Comparative Technology Office. Government-to-Government opportunities in cooperative research and development programs will be presented by Col Mike Malley, USAF, OSD Director, Coalition Warfare Program. Wednesday, 2 December • Room S330C • 1030 – 1200 ETSA/SISO Brieifing: International M&S Standards (See page 47 for more information) The purpose of this event is to highlight the importance of standards in modeling and simulation across Europe. Of particular focus will be defense budget constraints which are making reusability and interoperability in Simulation and Training essential. European Training and Simulation Association (ETSA), which has an agreement with the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) to support each other across Europe, can be seen as leading in an important, money saving, technology area. The presentations will not be detailed explanations of any particular standard, but will illustrate what standards are doing for NATO and in individual nations and how SISO standards are supporting the way forward under tight defense budgets. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 51 SPECIAL GUESTS Central Florida Veterans Organizations The citizens of the United States are more supportive of today’s men and women in Military Service than they have been since WWII. The Overseas Contingency Operations A veteran…is someone who, at one continue to be of great concern to all, whether in uniform or not. This I/ITSEC effort is point in his or her to especially inform U.S. Veterans about the dramatic changes in training methodologies life, wrote a blank and systems since their time in Service. Since 2006, I/ITSEC has had the pleasure and check made payable honor to have select members of Central Florida Veterans Organizations visit the exhibit floor on Wednesday. The successful experiences in broadening the Veterans’ to The United States understanding of today’s training transformation as well as the appreciation of the other of America for an I/ITSEC attendees in seeing the Veterans, some in their uniforms and with their amount of “up to and decorations, have made this an annual event for I/ITSEC. When you see these Veterans, including my life.” thank them for their service to the Nation. 52 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Papers TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER • All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) ROOM 1430 1500 T-1 Designing for Training Effectiveness Susan Coleman, Ph.D. Measuring Training Effectiveness of Lightweight Game-based Constructive Simulation (15007) Validating Scenario-based Training Sequencing: The Scenario Complexity Tool (15102) Adaptive Instructor Operating Stations: Design to Decrease Instructor Workload and Increase Effectiveness (15336) S320B S-1 Cutting Edge Training Angela Alban Mobile Augmented Reality for Force-on-Force Training (15223) h Emergency Medical Card Augmented Reality: Training Evaluation (15266) h Real-Time Cutting of Organs with Scissors (15333) h S320C EC-1 Easy Button John Dzenutis Automated Simulation Creation from Military Operations Documents (15227) Scheduling Training to Manage Acquisition & Decay (15340) M&S as a Service: Paradigm for Future Simulation Environments (15324) ñ ED-1 Assessment and Evaluation: Isolating Effects Robert “Buddha” Snyder Student Retention in STEM Career Paths: Primary Influences on the Decision to Stay or Leave (15018) Overcoming the Challenge of Evaluating Skills Transfer from Training to Job (15151) Measuring a Moving Target: Validating Deployed Training Courses (15189) H-1 This Won’t Hurt a Bit Robert Hester, Ph.D. Piloting a Groundbreaking Virtual Continuing Competency Platform: Results and Recommendations (15325) %h Mobile App Design for Veterans with Physical and Cognitive Limitations (15182) h Structured Development of Interventions to Improve Physician Knowledge Retention (15095) h P-1 Enterprise, Architecture, and Standards Jan Drabczuk The Live-Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Enterprise Architecture (15076) Early Adoption of Common Operating Environment (COE) Standards and Guidelines (15098) EC-2 Are We There Yet? Scott Ariotti Modelling a Helicopter Training Continuum to Support System Transformation (15165) ñ Military Vehicle Training with Augmented Reality (15180) S320D S320E S320F S330C ROOM SESSION/CHAIR 1600 1630 1700 S320A T-2 VR, AR, and AV for Training “Reality” Paul Lyon Training Effectiveness Evaluation of Augmented Virtuality for Call for Fire Training: Insights from a Novice Population (15014) Empirically Derived Recommendations for Training Novices Using Virtual Worlds (15038) Using Augmented Reality to Tutor Military Tasks in the Wild (15050) S320B S-2 Getting to the Right Scenarios & Data Roy Scrudder Virtual Battlespace Scenario Encoding for Reuse (15027) % Multi-Federate Scenario Development and Testing: “A Good Plan, Violently Executed” (15249) The Expected Results Method for Data Verification (15020) EC-3 Pinging and the Brain Luis Velazquez Cognitive Two-Way Interactions In an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment (15332) Modeling and Integrating Cognitive Agents Within the Emerging Cyber Domain (15232) Tablet Computer Call for Fire Simulation Proof of Concept Study Results (15008) ED-2 Navigating the Social and Educational Terrain Martin Bink, Ph.D. Enhancing Good Stranger Skills: A Method and Study (15071) Curriculum GPS: An Adaptive Curriculum Generation and Planning System (15369) H-2 Analyze This Bill Gerber, Ph.D. Work Domain Analysis for Ecological Interface Design of Tangible Interfaces (15130) Adaptive Testing: Adapt and Overcome the Shortfalls of Traditional Proficiency Assessments (15196) P-2 Design, Build, Track and Train – Here and Abroad Mary Trier Sejong the Great Class DDGs: How ROK Navy Trained and Embraced Them (15032) ñ A System-Model-Centric Collaborative Environment for the Acquisition Lifecycle (15093) EC-4 Avatars Crossing James (Josh) Jackson Turn-Based Gaming for Convoy Commander Training (15036) ñ% An Immersive Live / Virtual Bridge Approach with Ultra Wideband Tracking Technology: Phase II (15024) S320C S320D S320E S320F S330C Cognitive Load Assessment for Intelligence Analysts through Full Motion Video Analytics (15142) Virtualizing Humans for Game Ready Avatars (15023) LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T PAPER SESSIONS 1400 S320A SESSION/CHAIR Ï Cyber Security Mobile 53 WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER • All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) PAPER SESSIONS ROOM SESSION/CHAIR Developing Game-Based Leadership Training for Robotic Surgeons (15198) h The Use of Hyper-Realistic Surgical Simulation (15244) S320A T-3 Physician Know Thyself! Enhancing Surgical Team Skills through Gaming and Simulation Robert Heinlein S-3 Convergence of Testing & Training Karen Williams Polygone LVC: The New Paradigm for EW Training (15213) Live Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Infrastructure Architecture (LS TTE IA) Prototype (15099) Measuring Realism in Simulations for Training and Testing (15206) EC-5 Fidelity Matters Eric Weisel, Ph.D. Reliably Assessing the Effectiveness of a Plan with Models of Verying Fidelity and Under Time Constraints (15060) ñ Requirements for Future SAFs: Beyond Tactical Realism (15193) Required Fidelity of Simulated Wound at the Point of Injury (15351) h S320D ED-3 Full STEM Ahead Nina Deibler Mars Game: Creating and Evaluating an Engaging Educational Game (15105) The Secret for STEM Success: Employing Technology for Math Proficiency (15145) Inquiry and Design Approach to STEM Education Using Projectbased Learning (15238) S320E H-3 Do You Understand? John Schlott Multi-measure Assessment of Internal Distractions on Driver Performance(15017) Measuring Trust of Autonomous Vehicles: A Development and Validation Study (15049) Building Trust in a HumanRobot Team with Automatically Generated Explanations (15315) Virtual Interview Training Increases Job Offers for Veterans and Others (15013) Stepping Stones – An Augmented Reality Rehabilitation Game (15181) The VA Virtual Medical Center: Implementing a Vision for a Virtual Healthcare Campus for our Veterans (15358) h S320B S320C S320F EC-6 It’s All About Veterans Brian Holmes 0830 S210D ROOM 0900 0930 Special Paper Session: Best Papers from Around the Globe SESSION/CHAIR 1030 1100 1130 Human Performance Analysis and Engineering: You Cannot Hit What You Do Not Shoot (15209) BP-1 Best Papers from Education, Training, Human Performance Analysis and Engineering Anne Little, Ph.D. Education: Stress Exposure Training for the Dismounted Squad: The Human Dimension (15150) Training: Differentiating Measures of Learning (MOL) from Measures of Performance (MOP) During Aircraft Carrier Landing Practice (15210) S-4 From Reality to Simulation Mark Soodeen Network Bandwidth’s Effect on Virtual World Simulator Performance Optimization (15360) 3D Immersive Environment Using Battle Damage Computation X-Plane for Depth Perception Server (15051) Research (15261) S320C EC-7 Let’s Get Physiological Jennifer Murphy Visualizing fMRI Data Using Volume Rendering in Virtual Reality (15253) Professional Soldier Assessment of a Rifle-Mounted Target HandOff System (15039) ñ Empirical Support for BrainBased Assessment in SimulationBased Training (15300) S320D ED-4 Getting In Front of It Jay White Antecedents of Adaptive Collaborative Learning Environments (15211) Adaptable Resilience Training for Transitioning Veterans Using Existing Technologies (15285) The Changing Face of Military Learning (15327) H-4 It’s a Wild, Wild Cyber World Jennifer Arnold Automated Performance Assessment in Cyber Training Exercises (15044) Ï Command Shift: Exploring Modern Gaming Technologies to Create Next-Generation OCO Interfaces (15091) % Ï Embedded Cyber-Physical Systems for Assessing Performance in Training Simulations (15263) Ï P-3 Developing Competency – The Future for M&S Jeffrey A. Raver Improving Education, Training STEMulating: An Integrated and Career Advancement through Approach to Cultivating Our Competency Portability (15117) Future (15270) S320A S320B S320E S320F S210D Modeling and Simulation Professionals – Meeting the Demand (15342) Special Paper Session: Presentations from the Future Leaders Pavilion LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 54 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER • All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) SESSION/CHAIR S320A BP-2 Best Papers from Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies; Simulation; Policy Standards Management and Acquisition Tara Kilcullen Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies: Safe Testing of Autonomous Systems Performance (15348) Simulation: Cyber Operational Architecture Training System – Cyber for All (15108) Ï Policy Standards Management and Acquisition: Measuring Virtual Simulation’s Value in Training Exercises – USMC Use Case (15114) S320B S-5 Innovation in Environmental Modeling Roy Scrudder High Fidelity Wind Model Software for Real-Time Simulation Platforms (15362) ñ Automated Runtime Terrain Database Correlation Assessment (15218) Automated Modelization in Terrain Database Production (15290) S320C S-6 Human Interface to Artificial Intelligence Gerald Dreggors Modeling CGF Behavior with Machine Learning Techniques: Requirements and Future Directions (15128) ñ Automatic Speech Recognition in Training Systems: Misconceptions, Challenges and Paths Forward (15205) On the Peripheral Application of Head Mounted Display (HMD) Devices in Infantry Simulation (15186) ñ ED-5 Challenging the Game Adelle Lynch Game-Based Training for HumanIntelligence Skills (15067) % A Conceptual Model of Pedagogic Design to Support Critical Thinking in Commanders (15075) %ñ H-5 Maintaining Your Cool Elaine Raybourn, Ph.D. Human Performance in Content Using Micro and Macro Studies of Design for Interactive Augmented Tablets to Improve Maintenance Reality Systems (15156) (15279) P-4 Getting Your Money’s Worth Larry Rieger Calculating Simulation-Based Training Value: Cost Avoidance and Proficiency (15199) S320D S320E S320F ROOM S320A S320B S320C S320D S320E S320F SESSION/CHAIR 1400 1430 1500 Large Scale Adoption of Training Simulations: Are We There Yet? (15256) Automated Surveys: Lowering the Respondent’s Burden (15080) ñ 1630 1700 1600 T-4 Team Building: All for One and One for All Brian Cairns Assessing the Effects of Virtual Emergency Training on Mine Rescue Team Efficacy (15119) Alternative Front End Analysis for Automated Complex Systems (15121) Evaluating Distributed Teams with the Team Multiple Errands Test (15264) S-7 Next Gen LVC Robert Kleinhample M&S Training Transformation: Bridging the Next Generation Joint LVC (15167) Leveraging Cloud Computing Technology for LVC Training (15101) Osseus, An Experiment in What’s Next in LVC M&S Architecture (15085) EC-8 Experience with the Experience API Nick Giannias Putting Live Firing Range Data to Work Using the xAPI (15019) Adapting Gunnery Training Using the Experience API (15179) Opening Legacy Data Silos: Using Experience Data for Educational Impact (15043) ED-6 Instructors for the Force of the Future Jim Threlfall Designing Instructor Support Tools for Virtual Shiphandling Training (15133) Hey, Remember to Add Motivational Design to Your E-learning (15030) ñ Achieving Educational Excellence: What do Effective Instructors do? (15226) H-6 Flight Life Dennis Vincenzi, Ph.D. Helicopter Pilot’s Modeling Including the Stress Factor (15168) ñ Human-in-the-Loop Flight Simulation Study of Virtual Constructive Representation on Live Avionics Displays (15197) Practical Recommendations for Validating Survey Apparatus in Coalition Training Environments (15299) P-5 Cybersecurity: New Threats, New Policies, New Solutions Robby Robson, Ph.D. Risk Management Framework (RMF) Transition Impacts in Training Simulation Systems (15009) Ï Cybersecurity Controls: Then and Cybersecurity Challenges and Resolutions for Simulator & Now (15010) Ï Training Systems (15063) Ï LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T PAPER SESSIONS ROOM Ï Cyber Security Mobile 55 THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER • All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) ROOM SESSION/CHAIR 0830 0900 0930 PAPER SESSIONS T-5 Where’d Who Go? – Operational Considerations for LVC Training William Reuter Exercise Management Considerations for Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) Training (15281) Integrating Warship Bridge, Combat, and Deck Teams in LVC Environment (15191) Capability Assessment of Test and Live Training Systems for Real Time Casualty Assessment (15364) S-8 Simulation Supported Training Scott Hooper Embarking on a Home Station Training Revolution (15176) Implementation of Role-Based Command Hierarchy Model for Actor Cooperation (15166) ñ Innovative Division/Brigade Level CO Training Solution for Influence Operations (15107) ñ EC-9 3D Psycho John Dzenutis Rapid 3D Geospatially Oriented Structure Extraction from Minimal Image Sets (15323) Extending Intelligent Tutoring Beyond the Desktop to the Psychomotor Domain (15029) Delivering 3D Virtual Maintenance Training Content: Examining the Deployment Options (15239) S320D ED-7 It’s All About the Learning Mark Friedman Using a Skill Acquisition Theory as a Framework for the Army Learning (15125) Transmedia (Social) Learning in the Wild: DoD SkillBridge for Transitioning Service Members (15162) S320E H-7 Is That Your Final Decision? Eric Jarabak Stealth Assessment of ProblemSolving Skills from Gameplay (15212) % “Fixing” the Military DecisionMaking Process (15220) The Small Unit Decision Making Assessment Battery: Development and Psychometric Analysis (15143) S320F S-9 UAS Engineering Design Simulation Ron Dionne Reducing Operational Risk through Better Performance Testing (15138) Design of an Educational Tool for Unmanned Air Vehicle Design and Analysis (15086) Using Simulation to Test MannedUnmanned Teaming (15112) S320A S320B S320C ROOM SESSION/CHAIR S320A T-6 ISR, CRM, TDM, Oh My! – Different Domains, Universal Strategies Anne Little, Ph.D. Improving Military Crew Resource Management Using a Commercial Strategy Game (15097) ñ Simulation and Training Challenges for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Analysts (15175) Effectiveness of Process Level Feedback at Training Tactical Decision Making (15201) S320B S-10 Preparation Through Virtualization Brent Terwilliger, Ph.D. Design and Development of a General Virtual Maintenance Training Platform (15312) ñ Virtual Environment ComputerBased Training for Bridge and Tunnel Inspections (15276) Developing Authoring Tools for Skills Models that Enable Adaptive Game-Based Maintenance Training (15129) S320C EC-10 To Game or Not To Game Stu Armstrong Gamers Today, Surgeons Tomorrow? (15235) ñ h Relationship Between Learner and Environment: Learner Traits in Serious Games (15092) Learning Stories: Design Considerations for Narrative Elements in Serious Games (15303) % ED-8 Make a Mobile Ellen Menaker, Ph.D., Innovative Mobile Technologies for Assessing and Enhancing Soldier Performance (15082) A Reference Model for Designing Mobile Learning and Performance Support (15225) Development and Evaluation of Mobile Adaptive Training Technologies (15231) H-8 From the Halls of Montezuma Jerry Stahl MarineNet User Engagement Exercise (15011) Supporting Unit Training Management Through Mobile Performance Assessment Tools (15034) Marine Corps Instructor Master Model: A Foundation for Marine Faculty Professional Development (15146) S-11 Soldier Representation Lisa Jean Bair Toward Acquiring a Human Behavior Model of Competition vs. Cooperation (15316) Embedded Simulation to Prevent Tactical Surprise and Improve Soldier Performance (15054) Distributed Soldier Representation: Improving M&S Representation of the Soldier (15123) S320D S320E S320F 1030 1100 1130 LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 56 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER • All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) ROOM SESSION/CHAIR 1330 1400 1430 Procedural Reconstruction of Simulation Terrain Using Drones (15041) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Platform Performance Using Modeling and Simulation (15006) S320B S-12 The Business of Simulations Randy Crowe, Ph.D. A MBSE Approach in Modeling Systems Using Hybrid Simulation Techniques (15368) Simulator Architecture Upgrade Utilizing Virtual Machines (VMs) (15219) Improved Process for Bridging the Technology Transition Valley of Death (15103) S320C EC-12 A Little Design Will Do Ya Susan Harkrider Early Synthetic Prototyping: When We Build It, Will They Come? (15187) Implementation of Agile Methods within Instructional Systems Design: A Case Study (15094) Development and Evaluation of a Venipuncture and Phlebotomy Training Ssystem (15084) h H-9 Experience Counts Randy Jensen Realism and Effectiveness of Robotic Moving Targets (15118) Soldier Physiological Changes of Shooting Performance in the Tank Simulator (15192) ñ Novice and Experience Police Officer Simulation Experience: Guiding the Future (15370) ñ S320A S320E PAPER SESSIONS EC-11 Droning On John Aughey Reception Awards banquet & T H U R S D AY E V E N I N G HYATT REGENCY WINDERMERE BALLROOM WE WILL NOT PROVIDE SHUTTLE SERVICE TO/FROM THE CLOSING BANQUET. IF YOU HAVE A SPECIAL NEED PLEASE CONTACT BMCDANIEL@NDIA.ORG. BANQUET TICKET REQUIRED LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Ï Cyber Security Mobile 57 All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) B E S T PA P E R S E DU CATIO N B P - 1 WED NES DAY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1030 -1200 • S320A The Best Paper for this category will be presented on Wednesday in Room S320A at 1030 PAPERS AND AUTHORS Best Papers from Education, Training, Human Performance Analysis and Engineering Session Chair: Anne Little, Ph.D., ADDX Corporation Session Deputy:Sowmya Ramachandran, Ph.D., Stottler Henke Associates, Inc. Education: Stress Exposure Training for the Dismounted Squad: The Human Dimension (15150) Jay Brimstin, Ph.D., U.S. Army Maneuver Center of Excellence; SGM Higgs, Senior Enlisted Officer at PEO STRI; Rob Wolf, Brian Kemper PM TRADE; Rob Parrish, PM CATT; Dr. Joan Johnston, Pat Garrity, ARL HRED STTC; Jim Moon, Chris Jacques, Milton Fields, Sam Rhodes, Fort Benning MCoE; Anita Zabek, Paul Butler, Rick Osborne, Patrick Ogden, MITRE; Bill Ross, Brandon Woodhouse, Cognitive Performance Group Training: Differentiating Measures of Learning (MOL) from Measures of Performance (MOP) During Aircraft Carrier Landing Practice (15210) Jeffrey M. Beaubien, Ph.D., E. Webb Stacy, Ph.D., Sterling M. Wiggins, Michael J. Keeney, Ph.D., Aptima, Inc.; Amy Bolton, Ph.D., Office of Naval Research; LCDR Jefferson D. Grubb, Ph.D., USN, Naval Aviation System Program Office; Melissa M. Walwanis, Heather A. Priest, Ph.D., NAWCTSD; Christian S. Riddle, NAVAIRSYSCOM Manned Flight Simulator Human Performance Analysis and Engineering: You Cannot Hit What You Do Not Shoot (15209) Martin Bink, U.S. Army Research Institute; Elizabeth Uhl, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC; David James, Northrop Grumman Corporation B P - 2 W ED NES DAY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1400 -1530 • S320A Best Papers from Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies; Simulation; Policy Standards Management and Acquisition Session Chair: Tara Kilcullen, Raydon Corporation Session Deputy:Karen Williams, U.S. Army PEO STRI Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies: Safe Testing of Autonomous Systems Performance (15348) David Scheidt, Robert Lutz, William D’Amico, Ph.D., Dean Kleissas, Robert Chalmers, Robert Bamberger, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Simulation: Cyber Operational Architecture Training System – Cyber for All (15108) Ï David “Fuzzy” Wells, Ph.D., Derek Bryan, USPACOM J81 Policy Standards Management and Acquisition: Measuring Virtual Simulation’s Value in Training Exercises – USMC Use Case (15114) Nathan Jones, Greg Seavers, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS; Christin Capriglione, NAWCTSD STRESS EXPOSURE TRAINING FOR THE DISMOUNTED SQUAD: THE HUMAN DIMENSION (15150) ED -1 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 140 0 -1 5 3 0 • S3 2 0 D Assessment and Evaluation: Isolating Effects Session Chair: Robert “Buddha” Snyder, WBB, Inc. Session Deputy:Sally Carter, AETC Student Retention in STEM Career Paths: Primary Influences on the Decision to Stay or Leave (15018) Jennifer Winner, LT Christopher Faxon, USAF, AFRL; Michael D. Coovert Ph.D., University of South Florida Tampa Overcoming the Challenge of Evaluating Skills Transfer from Training to Job (15151) Toumnakone (Annie) Hester, Jay Brimstin, Ph.D., Maneuver Center of Excellence Fort Benning Measuring a Moving Target: Validating Deployed Training Courses (15189) Timothy R. Brock, Ph.D.; Denise R. Stevens, Ed.D., General Dynamics Information Technology ED -2 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 160 0 -1 7 3 0 • S3 2 0 D Navigating the Social and Educational Terrain Session Chair:Martin Bink, Ph.D., U.S. Army Research Institute Session Deputy:Anthony Carboniari, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Enhancing Good Stranger Skills: A Method and Study (15071) Robert Hubal, Mike van Lent, Ph.D., Bob Marinier, Ph.D, Chris Kawatsu, Bob Bechtel, Ph.D., Soar Technology, Inc. Curriculum GPS: An Adaptive Curriculum Generation and Planning System (15369) Mustafa Ilhan Akbas, Prateek Basavaraj, Özlem Garibay, Ivan Garibay, Michael Georgiopoulos, University of Central Florida ED -3 W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 083 0 -1 0 0 0 • S3 2 0 D Full STEM Ahead Session Chair: Nina Deibler, Serco Inc. Session Deputy:Tiffany Parrish, NAWCTSD Mars Game: Creating and Evaluating an Engaging Educational Game (15105) Kevin Dill, Spencer Frazier, Lockheed Martin; Barbara Freeman Ed.D., UC Berkeley; Juan Benito, Cooperative Entertainment Inc. The Secret for STEM Success: Employing Technology for Math Proficiency (15145) Edward P. Harvey, Jr., Advanced Training & Learning Technology, LLC; Marvin G. Fuller, Ph.D., Oglethorpe Charter School; Edward P. Harvey, III, Harvard University LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 58 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) ED -7 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 0830-1000 • S3 2 0 D It’s All About the Learning Session Chair: Mark Friedman, Adayana Government Group Session Deputy:Claudia Clark, Ph.D., NETC PAPERS AND AUTHORS Inquiry and Design Approach to STEM Education Using Project-based Learning (15238) Danielle McNeely, Robert Seltzer, NAWCTSD; Stephen Priselac, Ed.D., Nancy Priselac, Ed.D., nCASE; Heather Norton, Alicia Frascati, Orlando Science Center; Susan Nelson, AUVSI Foundation; Eileen Smith, University of Central Florida; Abdul Siddiqui, U.S. Army PEO STRI Using a Skill Acquisition Theory as a Framework for the Army Learning (15125) LTC Glenn A. Hodges, Ph.D., U.S. Army, TRADOC E D-4 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1030- 1200 • S 3 20D Transmedia (Social) Learning in the Wild: DoD SkillBridge for Transitioning Service Members (15162) Elaine Getting In Front of It M. Raybourn, Ph.D., Sandia National Laboratories/ADL Session Chair: Jay White, Department of Homeland Security Initiative; Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES, Force Readiness and Session Deputy:Thomas Archibald, IDSI Training, OASD(R); MGen Tom Jones, USMC (Ret.), Outdoor Antecedents of Adaptive Collaborative Learning Odyssey Environments (15211) Robert A. Sottilare, Ph.D., Joan H. Johnston, Ph.D., Anne M. Sinatra, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC; ED -8 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 1030-1200 • S3 2 0 D Shawn Burke, Ph.D., University of Central Florida; Eduardo Make a Mobile Salas, Ph.D., Rice University; Heather Holden, Ph.D., Mount Session Chair: Ellen Menaker, Ph.D., IDSI Washington University Session Deputy:Liz Gehr, Ph.D., The Boeing Company Adaptable Resilience Training for Transitioning Veterans Innovative Mobile Technologies for Assessing and Enhancing Using Existing Technologies (15285) Jill Sheperd, Jennifer Soldier Performance (15082) Krista L. Ratwani, Ukwa, Booz|Allen|Hamilton Ph.D., Courtney R. Dean, Camilla Knott, Ph.D., Frederick The Changing Face of Military Learning (15327) Sae Dietrich, Ph.D., Aptima, Inc.; Scott Flanagan, Sophia Speira; Schatz, Ph.D., Advanced Distributed Learning; David Jennifer S. Tucker, Ph.D., U.S. Army Research Institute Fautua, Ph.D., Joint Staff J7; Julian Stodd, SeaSalt Learning; A Reference Model for Designing Mobile Learning and Emile Reitz, Alion Science and Technology Performance Support (15225) Peter Berking, Jason Haag, Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative E D-5 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1400- 1530 • S 3 20D Development and Evaluation of Mobile Adaptive Training Challenging the Game Technologies (15231) Rodney Long, ARL HRED STTC; Session Chair: Adelle Lynch, Rockwell Collins Jessie Hyland, Joanne Barnieu, ICF International Session Deputy:Brian Stensrud, Ph.D., Soar Technology, Inc. Game-Based Training for Human-Intelligence Skills (15067) % John T. Miller, II, Consortium Research Fellows Program and Capella University; Martin L. Bink, Ph.D., U.S. Army Research Institute A Conceptual Model of Pedagogic Design to support Critical Thinking in Commanders (15075) % ñ Kia Hong Tan, Teng Howe Lim, Boon Kee Soh, DSO National Laboratories E D-6 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1600- 1730 • S 3 20D Instructors for the Force of the Future Session Chair: Jim Threlfall, C2 Technologies, Inc. Session Deputy:David Fautua, Joint Staff J7 Designing Instructor Support Tools for Virtual Shiphandling Training (15133) Martin Voshell, Ph.D., Ryan Kilgore, Ph.D., Christopher Hogan, David Young, Charles River Analytics Hey, Remember to Add Motivational Design to Your E-learning (15030) ñ Geir Isaksen, CDR, NoD University College; Siren Elise Frøytlog Hole, Transform AS Achieving Educational Excellence: What do Effective Instructors do? (15226) Heidi Keller-Glaze, Ph.D., Jonathan Bryson, Ray Morath, Ph.D., ICF International; U.S. Army Research Institute E ME R G ING C O NC E PT S & INNO VATIVE TE C H NO LO G IE S The Best Paper for this category will be presented on Wednesday in Room S320A at 1400 SAFE TESTING OF AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE (15348) EC-1 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 1400-1530 • S3 2 0 C Easy Button Session Chair: John Dzenutis, The Boeing Company Session Deputy:Susan Harkrider, RDECOM CRDEC NVESD Automated Simulation Creation from Military Operations Documents (15227) John Balint, Ph.D., Jan M. Allbeck, Ph.D., Michael R. Heib, Ph.D., George Mason University Scheduling Training to Manage Acquisition & Decay (15340) Mohammed Eslami, Ph.D., Jared Freeman, Ph.D., Scott Pappada, Ph.D., Aptima, Inc. M&S as a Service: Paradigm for Future Simulation Environments (15324) ñ Robert Siegfried, aditerna GmbH; Tom van den Berg, TNO LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Ï Cyber Security Mobile 59 All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) EC - 2 T U ES DAY, 1 DEC EMB ER • 1400-1530 • S330C EC-5 W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 083 0 -1 0 0 0 • S3 2 0 C PAPERS AND AUTHORS Are We There Yet? Fidelity Matters Session Chair: Scott Ariotti, The DiSTI Corporation Session Deputy:Brian Overy, Diamond Visionics Session Chair: Eric Weisel, Ph.D., Old Dominion University Session Deputy:Paul Bogard, USAF Simulators Division Modelling a Helicopter Training Continuum to Support System Transformation (15165) ñ Michael Johnstone, Ph.D., Vu Le, Ph.D., Burhan Khan, Doug Creighton, Ph.D., Center for Intelligent Systems Research; Ana Novak, Ph.D., Vivian Nguyen, Luke Tracey, Defence Science and Technology Organisation Reliably Assessing the Effectiveness of a Plan with Models of Verying Fidelity and Under Time Constraints (15060) ñ Steven de Jong, Ph.D., Wouter Noordkamp, Nick van der Poel, Selmar Smit, Ph.D., TNO Defence, Safety & Security Military Vehicle Training with Augmented Reality (15180) Jonathan Brookshire, Ph.D., Taragay Oskiper, Ph.D., Vlad Branzoi, Supun Samarasekera, Rakesh Kumar, Ph.D., SRI International; Sean Cullen, Richard Schaffer, Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training EC - 3 T U ES DAY, 1 DEC EMB ER • 1600-1730 • S320C Pinging and the Brain Requirements for Future SAFs: Beyond Tactical Realism (15193) Robert E. Wray, Ph.D., Soar Technology, Inc.; Heather A. Priest, Ph.D., Melissa M. Walwanis, Katherine Kaste, NAWCTSD Required Fidelity of simulated Wound at the Point of Injury (15351) h M. Beth H. Pettitt, ARL HRED STTC EC-6 W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 083 0 -1 0 0 0 • S3 2 0 F It’s All About Veterans Session Chair: Luis Velazquez, MARCORSYSCOM SIAT Session Deputy:Michael Finnern, Engility Corporation Session Chair:Brian Holmes, The AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. Session Deputy:Connie Perry: U.S. Army PEO STRI Cognitive Two-Way Interactions In an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment (15332) Brennan D. Cox, Ph.D., Harvey M. Edwards, Kathrine A. Service, Pinata H. Sessoms, Ph.D., Jose A. Dominguez, Ph.D., Weimin Zheng, Ph.D., Naval Health Research Center; Seth A. Reini, Ph.D., Navy Experimental Diving Unit Virtual Interview Training Increases Job Offers for Veterans and Others (15013) Dale E. Olsen, Ph.D., Laura B Humm, SIMmersion; Matthew J. Smith, Ph.D., Michael Fleming, M.D., Neil Jorden, Ph.D., Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Modeling and Integrating Cognitive Agents Within the Emerging Cyber Domain (15232) Randolph M. Jones, Ph.D., Ryan O’Grady, Denise Nicholson, Ph.D., Soar Technology Stepping Stones – An Augmented Reality Rehabilitation Game (15181) Stuart Armstrong, QinetiQ Inc. The VA Virtual Medical Center: Implementing a Vision for a Virtual Healthcare Campus for our Veterans (15358) h Rosalyn P. Scott, M.D., Terry L. Oroszi, Brian V. Burke, Tablet Computer Call for Fire Simulation Proof of Concept M.D., Cathy D. Graham, Ph.D., Dayton VA Medical Center; Study Results (15008) James Reynolds, USMC Nancy Benton, Ph.D., R.N., Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical TECOM; Craig Smith, USMC II MEF Center; Paul T. Ingmundson, Ph.D., South Texas Veterans Health Care System, Jenni Gallimore, Ph.D., Wright State EC - 4 TU ES DAY, 1 DEC EMB ER • 1600 -1730 • S330C University; Helga Carabello, VA Portland Health Care Avatars Crossing System; Sean M. McCoy, Ph.D., Veterans Rural Health Session Chair: James (Josh) Jackson, SAIC Resource Center-Eastern Region; Manny Dominguez, Ph.D., Session Deputy:Paul Thurkettle, NATO HQ SACT VHA Employee Education System; Mary E. Davidson, Healthcare System of Ohio Turn-Based Gaming for Convoy Commander Training (15036) ñ % Rudy Boonekamp, Tijmen Muller, TNO; EC-7 W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 103 0 -1 2 0 0 • S3 2 0 C Jur de Vrijer, SIMCEN RNA An Immersive Live / Virtual Bridge Approach with Ultra Wideband Tracking Technology: Phase II (15024) Jay Saffold, Tovar Shoaf, Jason Holutiak, Reseach Network, Inc.; Pat Garrity, Timothy Roberts, ARL HRED STTC Virtualizing Humans for Game Ready Avatars (15023) Jay Saffold, Tovar Shoaf, Jason Houliak, Research Network, Inc.; Timothy Roberts, Pat Garrity, ARL HRED STTC Let’s Get Physiological Session Chair:Jennifer Murphy, Ph.D., Quantum Improvements Consulting, LLC Session Deputy:Jefferson Grubb, NAVAIRSYSCOM Visualizing fMRI Data Using Volume Rendering in Virtual Reality (15253) Joseph Holub, Ph.D., Eliot Winer, Ph.D., Iowa State University Professional Soldier Assessment of a Rifle-Mounted Target Hand-Off System (15039) ñ Jerome Levesque, Ph.D., Katherine Banko, Ph.D., Defence Research & Development Canada; Olaf Binsch, Ph.D., Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 60 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) E C-8 Relationship Between Learner and Environment: Learner Traits in Serious Games (15092) Marvin G. Fuller, Ph.D., Oglethorpe Charter School; Dennis Beck, Ph.D., University of Arkansas PAPERS AND AUTHORS Empirical Support for Brain-Based Assessment in Simulation-Based Training (15300) Kevin B. Oden, Ph.D., Kelly L. Phillips, Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training; Kurtulus Izzetoglu, Ph.D., Patrick Craven, Ph.D., Hasan Ayaz, Ph.D., Gabriela Hernandez, Drexel University Learning Stories: Design Considerations for Narrative Elements in Serious Games (15303) % Michael W. Freeman, MW Freeman Solutions; Mark Friedman, Adayana, W ED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1600- 1730 • S 320C Inc. Experience with the Experience API Session Chair: Nick Giannias, CAE Session Deputy:Keith Biggers, Ph.D., Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station Putting Live Firing Range Data to Work Using the xAPI (15019) Paula J. Durlach, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC; Nick Washburn, Riptide Software, Inc.; Damon Regan, The Tolliver Group, Inc./ADL Initiative Adapting Gunnery Training Using the Experience API (15179) Rodney Long, ARL HRED STTC; Jennifer S. Murphy, Ph.D., Carolyn Newton, Quantum Improvements Consulting; Michael Hruska, Ashley L. Medford, Problem Solutions; Tara Kilcullen, Robert L. Harvey, Jr., Raydon Corporation Opening Legacy Data Silos: Using Experience Data for Educational Impact (15043) Jonathan Poltrack, Tom Creighton, Problem Solutions/ADL Initiative E C-9 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 1330-1500 • S3 2 0 A Droning On Session Chair: John Aughey, The Boeing Company Session Deputy:Joan Johnston, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC Procedural Reconstruction of Simulation Terrain Using Drones (15041) Ryan McAlinden, Evan Suma Ph.D., Timofey Grechkin, Ph.D., USC Institute for Creative Technologies; Michael Enloe, National Simulation Center Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Platform Performance Using Modeling and Simulation (15006) Brent Terwillinger, Ph.D., Dennis Vincenzi, Ph.D., David Ison, Ph.D., Todd Smith, Ph.D., Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide Campus EC-12 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 1330-1500 • S3 2 0 C A Little Design Will Do Ya Session Chair: Susan Harkrider, RDECOM CERDEC NVESD T H U R S D AY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 0830- 1000 • S 320C Session Deputy: Ryan McAlinden, USC/ICT 3D Psycho Session Chair: John Dzenutis, The Boeing Company Session Deputy:Ba Duong, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Rapid 3D Geospatially Oriented Structure Extraction from Minimal Image Sets (15323) R. Scott Starsman Ph.D., Avineon, Inc. Extending Intelligent Tutoring Beyond the Desktop to the Psychomotor Domain (15029) Robert A. Sottilare, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC; Joseph LaViola, Ph.D., University of Central Florida Delivering 3D Virtual Maintenance Training Content: Examining the Deployment Options (15239) Christopher Van Duyne, Scott Ariotti, The DiSTI Corporation E C-10 EC-11 Early Synthetic Prototyping: When We Build It, Will They Come? (15187) LTC Brian Vogt, USA, U.S. Army TRADOC; Michael Megiveron, Robert E. Smith, Ph.D., U.S. Army TARDEC Implementation of Agile Methods within Instructional Systems Design: A Case Study (15094) Lisa Cooney, Anne Little, Ph.D., Addx Corporation Development and Evaluation of a Venipuncture and Phlebotomy Training System (15084) h Teresita M. Sotomayor, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC; Angela M. Alban, SIMETRI, Inc. T H U R S D AY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 1030- 1200 • S320C To Game or Not To Game Session Chair: Stu Armstrong, QinetiQ, Inc. Session Deputy:Leslie Dubow, Veterans Health Administration SimLEARN Gamers Today, Surgeons Tomorrow? (15235) ñ h Alyssa Tanaka, Courtney Graddy, Roger Smith, Ph.D., Florida Hospital Nicholson Center; Manuela Perez, Ph.D., Nancy University Hospital LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Ï Cyber Security Mobile 61 All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) H UMA N P E R F O R M A NC E ANA LYS I S A N D E N G I N EE R ING PAPERS AND AUTHORS Gregory A. Fabiano, Ph.D., Department of Counseling, School and Educational Psychology; Mark G. Frank, Ph.D., Department of Communications; Rebecca J. Houston, Ph.D., The Best Paper for this category will be presented Research institute on Addictions; Panos Ch. Anastasopoulos, on Wednesday in Room S320A at 1030 Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental YOU CANNOT HIT WHAT YOU DO NOT SHOOT (15209) Engineering, The State University of New York-University at H-1 T U ES DAY, 1 DEC EMB ER • 1400 -1530 • S320E Buffalo This Won’t Hurt a Bit Session Chair:Robert Hester, Ph.D., University of Mississippi Medical Center Session Deputy:Ingrid Mellone, Camber Corporation Measuring Trust of Autonomous Vehicles: A Development and Validation Study (15049) David R. Garcia, Christine Kreutzer, Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola, University of Central Florida, Psychology Department Piloting a Groundbreaking Virtual Continuing Competency Platform: Results and Recommendations (15325) % h Jennifer McNamara, BreakAway Games; Paul Grace, Margaret Bent, Ph.D., National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy, Inc. Building Trust in a Human-Robot Team with Automatically Generated Explanations (15315) Ning Wang, Ph.D., David V. Pynadath, Ph.D., University of Southern California Mobile App Design for Veterans with Physical and Cognitive Limitations (15182) h Nina P. Deibler, Lea G. Blake, Serco, Inc.; Devin Harrison, William Plew, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs It’s a Wild, Wild Cyber World Structured Development of Interventions to Improve Physician Knowledge Retention (15095) h Lloyd Werk, M.D., Maria Carmen Diaz, M.D., James P. Franciosi, M.D., Tim Wysocki, Nemours Children’s Health System, Jacksonville; Lorie Ingraham, James Crutchfield, Ph.D., Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training Automated Performance Assessment in Cyber Training Exercises (15044) Ï Robert G. Abbott, Ph.D., Jonathan McClain, Benjamin Anderson, Kevin Nauer, Austin Silva, Chris Forsythe, Ph.D., Sandia National Laboratories H-2 W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 103 0 -1 2 0 0 • S3 2 0 E Session Chair: Jennifer Arnold, Booz|Allen|Hamilton, Inc. Session Deputy:Elaine Raybourn, Ph.D., Sandia National Laboratories, ADL Initiative Command Shift: Exploring Modern Gaming Technologies to Create Next-Generation Offensive Cyber Operations (OCO) Interfaces (15091) % Ï Chad Caison, KEYW T U ES DAY, 1 DEC EMB ER • 1600 -1730 • S320E Corporation; Jennifer McNamara, BreakAway Games Analyze This Session Chair: Bill Gerber, Ph.D., WJ Gerber Consulting Session Deputy:Matthew Hackett, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC Work Domain Analysis for Ecological Interface Design of Tangible Interfaces (15130) Michael W. Boyce, Ph.D., Robert A. Sottilare, Ph.D., Benjamin Goldberg, Ph.D., Charles Amburn, ARL HRED STTC Adaptive Testing: Adapt and Overcome the Shortfalls of Traditional Proficiency Assessments (15196) Robert McLaughlin, Steven Gunter, Ph.D., Camber Corporation; Jeff Pearson, Veterans Benefits Administration Cognitive Load Assessment for Intelligence Analysts through Full Motion Video Analytics (15142) Elizabeth Wilson, Chenega Technical Innovations, LLC; Upesh Patel, U.S. Army Intelligence H-3 H -4 WED NES DAY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 0830-1000 • S320E Do You Understand? Session Chair: John Schlott, L-3 Communications Session Deputy:Todd Glenn, FAAC, Inc. Embedded Cyber-Physical Systems for Assessing Performance in Training Simulations (15263) Ï P. Shane Gallagher, Ph.D., ADL Initiative; Brenda Bannan, Ph.D., Bridgett Lewis, George Mason University; Shelly Blake-Plock, Yet Analytics H -5 W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 140 0 -1 5 3 0 • S3 2 0 E Maintaining Your Cool Session Chair:Elaine Raybourn, Ph.D., Sandia National Laboratories, ADL Initiative Session Deputy:Amit Kapadia, U.S. Army PEO STRI Human Performance in Content Design for Interactive Augmented Reality Systems (15156) Louise Yarnall, Ph.D., Anna Werner, Rakesh “Teddy” Kumar, Ph.D., Supun Samarasekera, Girish Acharya, Glenn Murray, Michael Wolverton, Zhiwei Zhu, Vlad Branzoi, Nicholas Vitovitch, Jim Carpenter, SRI International Using Micro and Macro Studies of Tablets to Improve Maintenance (15279) Robert Pokorny, Ph.D., Jacqueline Haynes, Ph.D, Lisa Holt, Ph.D., Intelligent Automation, Inc.; Michael diPilla, NAWC Carderock Multi-measure Assessment of Internal Distractions on Driver Performance (15017) Kevin F. Hulme, Ph.D., Center for Engineering Design and Applied Simulation; Karen L. Morris, The Center for Children and Families; LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 62 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) H-6 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1600- 1730 • S 320E H -9 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 1330-1500 • S3 2 0 E Experience Counts Session Chair: Dennis Vincenzi, Ph.D., ERAU Worldwide Session Deputy:Maureen Bergondy-Wilhelm, NAWCTSD Session Chair: Randy Jensen, Stottler Henke Associates, Inc. Session Deputy:Dennis Vincenzi, Ph.D., ERAU Worldwide Helicopter Pilot’s Modeling Including the Stress Factor (15168) ñ Antoni Kopyt, Warsaw University of Technology Realism and Effectiveness of Robotic Moving Targets (15118) Elizabeth Uhl, Ph.D., Martin Bink, Ph.D., U.S. Army Research Institute; David James, Northrop Grumman Technical Services Human-in-the-Loop Flight Simulation Study of Virtual Constructive Representation on Live Avionics Displays (15197) Thomas Schnell, Ph.D., University of Iowa; Angus L.M. Thom McLean, Ph.D., Scott Rediger, Rockwell Collins Advanced Technology Center Practical Recommendations for Validating Survey Apparatus in Coalition Training Environments (15299) Emilie Reitz, Alion Science and Technology H-7 T H U R S D AY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 0830- 1000 • S320E Is That Your Final Decision? Session Chair: Eric Jarabak, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Session Deputy:Steve Monson, The Boeing Company Stealth Assessment of Problem-Solving Skills from Gameplay (15212) % Weinan Zhao, Valerie Shute, Ph.D., Lubin Wang, Florida State University PAPERS AND AUTHORS Flight Life Soldier Physiological Changes of Shooting Performance in the Tank Simulator (15192) ñ Li-Wei Ko, Ph.D., Peng-Wen Lai, Yi-Cheng Shih, Shih-Chuan Lin, Meng-Shun Yang, ChinTeng Lin, Ph.D., National Chiao Tung University; In-Chung Chang, MND Taipei Novice and Experience Police Officer Simulation Experience: Guiding the Future (15370) ñ Amanda Davies, Ph.D., Charles Stuart University PO LIC Y, STA NDA R DS, MA NA G E ME NT, A ND A C Q U ISITION The Best Paper for this category will be presented on Wednesday in Room S320A at 1400 MEASURING VIRTUAL SIMULATION’S VALUE IN TRAINING EXERCISES – USMC USE CASE (15114) “Fixing” the Military Decision-Making Process (15220) Michael J. Smith, Ronald B. Sprinkle, Leidos; COL Johnny Powers, U.S. Army PEO STRI; James Xu, Adayana; Michael Knapp, Aptima, Inc. P-1 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 1400-1530 • S3 2 0 F The Small Unit Decision Making Assessment Battery: Development and Psychometric Analysis (15143) Karol G. Ross, Ph.D., Jennifer K. Phillips, Cognitive Performance Group; Kenneth A. Knarr, II Corps Consultants, Inc. The Live-Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Enterprise Architecture (15076) Paul Dumanoir, U.S. Army PEO STRI; Jeff Bergenthal, David Drake, the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Enterprise, Architecture, and Standards Session Chair: Jan Drabczuk, JD Defense Solutions, LLC. Session Deputy:Harry Sotomayor, U.S. Army PEO STRI Early Adoption of Common Operating Environment (COE) T H U R S D AY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 1030- 1200 • S 320E Standards and Guidelines (15098) Robert Wittman, From the Halls of Montezuma Ph.D., Burt Grippin, Sean Barie, Chris Holmes, MITRE Session Chair: Jerry Stahl, Cypress International Corporation; Amit Kapadia, Paul Dumanoir, U.S. Army PEO Session Deputy:Sherrie Jones, Ph.D., MARCORSYSCOM PM STRI TRASYS P-2 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 1600-1730 • S3 2 0 F MarineNet User Engagement Exercise (15011) Maj Michael A. Gavin, USMC, Marine Corps University, College of Design, Build, Track and Train – Here and Abroad Distance Education & Training Session Chair:Mary Trier, Capital Communications and Consulting Supporting Unit Training Management Through Mobile Session Deputy:Richard Grohs, USAF HQ Air Combat Command Performance Assessment Tools (15034) Courtney Dean, Matthew Puglisi, Jared Freeman, Ph.D., Aptima, Inc. Sejong the Great Class DDGs: How ROK Navy Trained and Embraced Them (15032) ñ LCDR Junho Eum, Sangyoon Marine Corps Instructor Master Model: A Foundation Oh, Ph.D., Ajou University; CAPT Minsoo Yang, Republic of for Marine Faculty Professional Development (15146) Korea Navy Headquarters Jennifer J. Vogel-Walcutt, Ph.D. Jennifer K. Phillips, Karol G. Ross, Ph.D., Cognitive Performance Group, Kenneth A. A System-Model-Centric Collaborative Environment for the Knarr, II Corps Consultants, Inc. Acquisition Lifecycle (15093) James E. Coolahan, Ph.D., Coolahan Associates, LLC.; Jeffery J. Bergenthal, John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory H-8 LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Ï Cyber Security Mobile 63 All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) P-3 SIMU LAT IO N WED NES DAY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1030-1200 • S320F Developing Competency – The Future for M&S PAPERS AND AUTHORS Session Chair: Jeffrey A. Raver, SAIC Session Deputy:Tara Kilcullen, Raydon Corporation Improving Education, Training and Career Advancement through Competency Portability (15117) Robby Robson, Ph.D., Eduworks Corporation STEMulating: An Integrated Approach to Cultivating Our Future (15270) Elizabeth Biddle, Ph.D., Central FL STEM Education Council; Carol Ann Dykes, University of Central Florida; Shawn Harrs, Ph.D., Universal Orlando Resort; Robert Seltzer, NAWCTSD; Abdul Siddiqui, U.S. Army PEO STRI Modeling and Simulation Professionals – Meeting the Demand (15342) Lisa Jean Bair, James J. Jackson, SAIC The Best Paper for this category will be presented on Wednesday in Room S320A at 1400 CYBER OPERATIONAL ARCHITECTURE TRAINING SYSTEM – CYBER FOR ALL (15108) S-1 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 140 0 -1 5 3 0 • S3 2 0 B Cutting Edge Training Session Chair: Angela Alban, SIMETRI Session Deputy:Mark Soodeen, CAE Mobile Augmented Reality for Force-on-Force Training (15223) h Richard Schaffer, Sean Cullen, Laura Cerritelli, Lockheed Martin; Rakesh Kumar, Ph.D., Supun Samarasekera, Mikhail Sizintsev, Ph.D., Taragay Oskiper, Ph.D., Vlad Branzoi, SRI International Emergency Medical Card Augmented Reality: Training Evaluation (15266) h Christina L. Lacerenza, C. P-4 W ED NES DAY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1400-1530 • S320F Shawn Burke, Ph.D., David S. Metcalf, Ph.D., Shannon L. Getting Your Money’s Worth Marlow, University of Central Florida; Christine Allen, Mark Session Chair: Larry Rieger, SAIC Mazzeo, ARL HRED STTC Session Deputy:Emilie Reitz, Alion Science & Technology Real-Time Cutting of Organs with Scissors (15333) h Calculating Simulation-Based Training Value: Cost Avoidance and Proficiency (15199) Tim Cooley, Ph.D., DynamX Consulting; Greg Seavers, John Roth, Jose Rodriguez, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS; Steven Gordon, Ph.D., Georgia Tech Research Institute Large Scale Adoption of Training Simulations: Are We There Yet? (15256) Angela Sadagic, Ph.D., Naval Postgraduate School; Lt Col Floy A. Yates, Jr., USMC, MAGTFTC Battle Simulation Center Automated Surveys: Lowering the Respondent’s Burden (15080) ñ Richard Kist, Igor Franken, National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) P-5 W ED NES DAY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1600 -1730 • S320F Edouard Poutot, Aditya Bhatia, CAE, Inc., Healthcare Division S-2 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 160 0 -1 7 3 0 • S3 2 0 B Getting to the Right Scenarios & Data Session Chair:Roy Scrudder, The University of Texas at Austin, Applied Research Laboratories Session Deputy:Mike Flanagan, CACI-Federal Virtual Battlespace Scenario Encoding for Reuse (15027) % Capt Michael J. Eady, USMC, USMC TECOM; LTC David W. Parkes, USA, Joint Staff J7 Multi-Federate Scenario Development and Testing: “A Good Plan, Violently Executed” (15249) Donald C. Meinshausen, Lockheed Martin; Mitchell Faircloth, SAIC The Expected Results Method for Data Verification (15020) Cybersecurity: New Threats, New Policies, New Solutions Paul Monday, Lockheed Martin Session Chair: Robby Robson, Ph.D., Eduworks Corporation Session Deputy:Kevin Hulme, Ph.D., University at Buffalo S-3 Risk Management Framework (RMF) Transition Impacts in Training Simulation Systems (15009) Ï Graham Fleener, Marco Mayor, U.S. Army PEO STRI; Cliff Zou, Ph.D., University of Central Florida Cybersecurity Controls: Then and Now (15010) Ï Marco Mayor, U.S. Army PEO STRI Cybersecurity Challenges and Resolutions for Simulator & Training Systems (15063) Ï Douglas E. Wedel, Ilya Lipkin, Lt. Luis Cintron, USAF W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 083 0 -1 0 0 0 • S3 2 0 B Convergence of Testing & Training Session Chair: Karen Williams, U.S. Army PEO STRI Session Deputy:Favio Lopez, Trideum Corporation Polygone LVC: The New Paradigm for EW Training (15213) Lt Col Scott Case, USAF Warrior Preparation Center Detachment 3 Germany; Ryan McLaughlin, Northrop Grumman Live Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Infrastructure Architecture (LS TTE IA) Prototype (15099) Paul Dumanoir, Mike Willoughby, U.S. Army PEO STRI; Brent Grippin, Richard Crutchfield, Rob Wittman, Ph.D., Sean Barie, MITRE Corporation Measuring Realism in Simulations for Training and Testing (15206) Jerrit Askvig, Phil Hallenbeck, The MITRE Corporation LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 64 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) S-4 W ED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1030- 1200 • S 320B On the Peripheral Application of Head Mounted Display (HMD) Devices in Infantry Simulation (15186) ñ Tomer J. Michael, IDF GFC Battle-Lab Session Chair: Mark Soodeen, CAE From Reality to Simulation Network Bandwidth’s Effect on Virtual World Simulator Performance Optimization (15360) Sean C. Mondesire, Ph.D., Douglas B. Maxwell, ARL HRED STTC; Jonathan Stevens, Ph.D., University of Central Florida 3D Immersive Environment Using X-Plane for Depth Perception Research (15261) Logan A. Williams, Ph.D., Charles T. Bullock, Marc D. Winterbottom, Ph.D., James P. Gaska, Ph.D., Steven C. Hadley, MD, USAF School of Aerospace Medicine; Charles J. Lloyd, Ph.D., Visual Performance, LLC; Michael P. Browne, Ph.D., SA Photonics S-7 PAPERS AND AUTHORS Session Deputy:Ron Dionne, FLETC W ED N ESD AY, 2 D ECEM BER • 1600-1730 • S3 2 0 B Next Gen LVC Session Chair: Robert Kleinhample, SAIC Session Deputy:Gordon King, Intelligent Decisions, Inc. M&S Training Transformation: Bridging the Next Generation Joint LVC (15167) Bruce Uphoff, Camber Corportion; Michael Koscielniak, Los Alamos National Laboratory; Brian Gregg, Karl Hines, Joint Staff J7; John Mizelle, Daniel Leigeber, Intelligent Decision Systems, Inc. Leveraging Cloud Computing Technology for LVC Training (15101) Paul Dumanoir, U.S. Army PEO STRI; Henry Battle Damage Computation Server (15051) Hung Tran, Marshall, ARL HRED STTC; Robert Wells, Dynamic Tactical Systems, CAE USA Animation Systems; Jeff Truong, Effective Applications S-5 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1400- 1530 • S 320B Corporation Osseus, An Experiment in What’s Next in LVC M&S Innovation in Environmental Modeling Architecture (15085) Mark Riecken, Ph.D., John Session Chair:Roy Scrudder, The University of Texas at Rutledge, Trideum Corporation; Derrick Franceschini, Austin, Applied Research Laboratories StakFrame, LLC; Scott Gallant, Effective Applications; Walter Session Deputy:Robert Dixon, U.S. Army PEO STRI Barge, OSD Force Readiness and Training High Fidelity Wind Model Software for Real-Time Simulation Platforms (15362) ñ Jaime Sanchez, Juan S-8 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 0830-1000 • S3 2 0 B Pelaez, Ph.D., SimSpace Ingenieria, S.L. Automated Runtime Terrain Database Correlation Assessment (15218) Jeremy P. Joseph, Andrew Tosh, GameSim, Inc.; Benito Graniela, Ph.D., NAWCTSD Automated Modelization in Terrain Database Production (15290) Stephen Eckman, GameSim, Inc.; Ronald Moore, Leidos; Mark Johnson, U.S. Army PEO STRI; Jaeson Munro, PAI Simulation Supported Training Session Chair: Scott Hooper, Havok, an Intel Company Session Deputy:Lisa Jean Bair, SAIC Embarking on a Home Station Training Revolution (15176) Anthony J. Cerri, U.S. Army TRADOC; Mathew N. McMillan, Alan J. Knox, CGI Federal Implementation of Role-Based Command Hierarchy Model for Actor Cooperation (15166) ñ Jungyoon Kim, Ph.D., S-6 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1400- 1530 • S 320C Hee-Soo Kim, Ph.D., REALTIMEVISUAL, Republic of Korea; Sangjin Lee, Ph.D., Samjoon Park, Ph.D., Agency for Human Interface to Artificial Intelligence Defense Development, Republic of Korea Session Chair:Gerald Dreggors, Northrop Grumman Innovative Division/Brigade Level CO Training Solution for Corporation Influence Operations (15107) ñ Ariane Bitoun, Romain Session Deputy:Brad Cope, NAWCTSD Bosa, MASA Group; Tahar Hannachi, Université Pierre Modeling CGF Behavior with Machine Learning Techniques: et Marie Curie; Lionel Khimeche, Direction Générale de Requirements and Future Directions (15128) ñ Armon l’Armement Toubman, Ph.D., Gerald Poppinga, Jan Joris Roessingh, Ph.D., National Aerospace Laboratory NLR; Ming Hou, Ph.D., Defence Research and Development Canada; Linus Loutsinen, Ph.D., Swedish Defence Research Agency FOI Rikke Amilde Løvlid, Ph.D., Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI); Christophe Meyer, Ph.D., Thales; Roel Rijken, Dutch Ministry of Defence; Micha Turcanik, Ph.D. Armed Forces Academy Liptovský Mikulàš, Slovakia Automatic Speech Recognition in Training Systems: Misconceptions, Challenges and Paths Forward (15205) Brian Stensrud, Ph.D., Charles Newton, Soar Technology, Inc.; Beth Atkinson, John Killilea, NAWCTSD LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Ï Cyber Security Mobile 65 All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) S-9 T H U R S DAY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 0830-1000 • S320F Distributed Soldier Representation: Improving M&S Representation of the Soldier (15123) Manuel Diego, Clayton W. Burford, ARL HRED STTC; Joseph S. McDonnell, Session Chair: Ron Dionne, FLETC Ph.D., Bert Davis, Gary Smith, Dynamic Animation Systems Session Deputy:Jerry Gordon, Cubic Global Defense Inc.; Derick Franceshini, StackFrame, LLC Corporation UAS Engineering Design Simulation PAPERS AND AUTHORS Reducing Operational Risk through Better Performance Testing (15138) Tom Wilson, Lockheed Martin Design of an Educational Tool for Unmanned Air Vehicle Design and Analysis (15086) Brian Sanders, Ph.D., Brent Terwilliger, Ph.D., Ken Witcher, Mark Leary, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; James Ohlman, Christina Tucker, Pinnacle Solutions Using Simulation to Test Manned-Unmanned Teaming (15112) Michael J. O’Connor, Trideum Corporation; Kenneth LeSueur, Ph.D, Mark Ebert, Sean Millich, Redstone Test Center; Fred Ventrone, CTSi; Tom Punihaole, Scalable Network Technologies S-12 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 133 0 -1 5 0 0 • S3 2 0 B The Business of Simulations Session Chair:Randy Crowe, Ph.D., Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training Session Deputy:Greg Sidor, AFRL A MBSE Approach in Modeling Systems Using Hybrid Simulation Techniques (15368) Asli Soyler Akbas, Waldemar Karwowski, Ph.D., University of Central Florida Simulator Architecture Upgrade Utilizing Virtual Machines (VMs) (15219) Thomas Bridgman, National Technologies Associates; Elizabeth Gaugler, USAF Simulators Division Improved Process for Bridging the Technology Transition T H UR S DAY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 1030 -1200 • S320B Valley of Death (15103) Henry Marshall, ARL HRED STTC; Paul Dumanoir, U.S. Army PEO STRI; Robert Preparation Through Virtualization Wells, Dynamic Animation Systems; Bob Burch, Dignitas Session Chair:Brent Terwilliger, Ph.D., Embry-Riddle Technologies, LLC; Jeff Truong, Effective Applications Aeronautical University Session Deputy:Randy Crowe, Ph.D., Lockheed Martin Mission Corporation S-10 Systems and Training Design and Development of a General Virtual Maintenance Training Platform (15312) ñ Xingxin Li, Ph.D., Jianping Hao, Fei Ye, Shijiazhuang Mechanical Engineering College, P.R. China; Xu Yang, The University of Tennessee Virtual Environment Computer-Based Training for Bridge and Tunnel Inspections (15276) Steve Ianni, Engility Corporation; Mary P. Rosik, Michael Baker International Developing Authoring Tools for Skills Models that Enable Adaptive Game-Based Maintenance Training (15129) Sean Guarino, Peter Weyhruch, Ph.D., James Niehaus, Ph.D., Charles River Analytics, Inc. T R A INING The Best Paper for this category will be presented on Wednesday in Room S320A at 1030 DIFFERENTIATING MEASURES OF LEARNING (MOL) FROM MEASURES OF PERFORMANCE (MOP) DURING AIRCRAFT CARRIER LANDING PRACTICE (15210) T-1 TUESD AY, 1 D ECEM BER • 140 0 -1 5 3 0 • S3 2 0 A Designing for Training Effectiveness Session Chair:Susan Coleman, Ph.D., Intelligent Decision Systems, Inc. Session Deputy: Graham Fleener, U.S. Army PEO STRI Measuring Training Effectiveness of Lightweight GameS-11 T H U R S DAY, 3 DEC EMB ER • 1030 -1200 • S320F based Constructive Simulation (15007) Jonathan Stevens, Ph.D., Stephen Serge, Ph.D., Dean Reed, University of Soldier Representation Central Florida; Latika Eifert, ARL HRED STTC; Boris Session Chair: Lisa Jean Bair, SAIC Stilman, Ph.D., University of Colorado; Oleg Umansky, Session Deputy:Bradley Ehrhardt, NAWCTSD Ph.D., STILMAN Advanced Strategies Toward Acquiring a Human Behavior Model of Competition Validating Scenario-based Training Sequencing: The Scenario vs Cooperation (15316) David V. Pynadath, Ning Complexity Tool (15102) Robb Dunne, Ph.D., Innovative Wang, Ph.D., Chirag Merchant, USC Institute for Creative Reasoning, LLC; Stephen A. Sivo, Ph.D., University of Technologies Central Florida; Nathan Jones, MARCORSYSCOM PM Embedded Simulation to Prevent Tactical Surprise and TRASYS Improve Soldier Performance (15054) Jonathan Stevens, Adaptive Instructor Operating Stations: Design to Decrease Ph.D., University of Central Florida; Latika Eifert, ARL HRED Instructor Workload and Increase Effectiveness (15336) STTC; Timothy Baldwin, EOIR Technologies; Oleg Umanskiy, James A. Pharmer, Ph.D., Laura M. Milham, Ph.D., Boris Stilman, Ph.D., STILMAN Advanced Strategies NAWCTSD; John A. Valaitis, John Winters, Basic Commerce and Industries, Inc. LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter 66 Ï Cyber Security Mobile 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E All Papers are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) T- 2 T U ES D AY, 1 DEC EMB ER • 1600- 1730 • S320A Alternative Front End Analysis for Automated Complex Systems (15121) Natalie Drzymala, Tim Buehner, Ph.D., Session Chair:Paul Lyon, Esterline Simulation Visual Systems Linda Brent, Ed.D., The ASTA Group, LLC.; M. Glenn Cobb, U.S. Army Research Institute; John Nelson, Engility Session Deputy:Robert Wallace, USAF Air Combat Command Corporation Training Effectiveness Evaluation of Augmented Virtuality Evaluating Distributed Teams with the Team Multiple for Call for Fire Training: Insights from a Novice Population (15014) Julie N. Salcedo, Ph.D., Stephen R. Serge, Ph.D., Errands Test (15264) Jamiahus Walton, Stephen Gilbert, Ph.D., Eliot Winer, Ph.D., Michael Dorneich, Ph.D., Stephanie J. Lackey, Ph.D., Jonathan Hurter, University of Central Florida Institute for Simulation and Training; Roberto Desmond Bonner, Iowa State University Champney, Ph.D., Design Interactive; Gino Fragomeni, ARL T-5 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 0830-1000 • S3 2 0 A HRED STTC VR, AR, and AV for Training “Reality” Using Augmented Reality to Tutor Military Tasks in the Wild (15050) Joseph J. LaViola, Ph.D., Brian M. Williamson, Conner Brooks, Sergiu Veazanchin, University of Central Florida; Robert Sottilare, Ph.D., Pat Garrity, ARL HRED STTC PAPERS AND AUTHORS Empirically Derived Recommendations for Training Novices Using Virtual Worlds (15038) Crystal S. Maraj, Ph.D., Stephanie J. Lackey, Ph.D., Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola, Sherry L. Ogreteen, University of Central Florida, Institute for Simulation and Training; Douglas B. Maxwell, ARL HRED STTC Where’d Who Go? – Operational Considerations for LVC Training Session Chair: William Reuter, R-Squared Solutions, LLC Session Deputy:Daniel Cain, OPNAV N98 Exercise Management Considerations for Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) Training (15281) Katherine P. Kaste, Kelly Neville, Ph.D., Melissa M. Walwanis, NAWCTSD; Amy E. Bolton, Ph.D., Office of Naval Research Integrating Warship Bridge, Combat, and Deck Teams in LVC Environment (15191) Eric Phipps, Engility, Inc.; Richard Gaughen, Camber, Inc. T- 3 WED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 0830- 1000 • S 320A Capability Assessment of Test and Live Training Systems for Real Time Casualty Assessment (15364) Joan H. Physician Know Thyself! Enhancing Surgical Team Skills through Gaming and Simulation Johnston, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC; Margaret D. Nolan, Session Chair: Robert Heinlein, 3D Systems NAWCTSD; Jake Caldwell, University of Central Florida Session Deputy:Kerri Chik, TiER1 Performance Solutions T-6 TH URSD AY, 3 D ECEM BER • 1030-1200 • S3 2 0 A Developing Game-Based Leadership Training for Robotic Surgeons (15198) h Roger Smith, Ph.D., Alyssa D. S. Tanaka, Florida Hospital Nicholson Center; Steve McIlwan, Brad Wilson, Applied Research Associates, Inc. The Use of Hyper-Realistic Surgical Simulation (15244) Anthony J. LaPorta, M.D., FACS, Douglas Robinson, MS4, Mark Lea, FACS, Rocky Vista University School of Medicine; Charles Hutchinson, DO, U.S. Army; Reginald Franciose, M.D., FACS, Lawrence Gaul, M.D. FACS, Vail Valley Medical Center; Roy Alson, M.D., Ph.D., Wake Forest University; Michael Czekajlo, M.D., Ph.D., Hunter Maguire VA Hospital, Virginia Commonwealth University; Douglas Granger, Ph.D., Arizona State University and Salimetrics, Inc.; Alan Moloff, D.O., USA (Ret), Aerospace Medicine; Tuan Hoang, M.D., FACS, Commander, U.S. Navy. San Diego T- 4 ISR, CRM, TDM, Oh My! – Different Domains, Universal Strategies Session Chair: Anne Little, Ph.D., Addx Corporation Session Deputy:Jeffrey Beaubien, Aptima, Inc. Improving Military Crew Resource Management Using a Commercial Strategy Game (15097) ñ Christopher Roos, Jelke van der Pal, Ph.D., Ghanshaam Sewnath, Johan Meijer, National Aerospace Laboratory NLR; Lt Col Michel de Rivecourt, Centre for Man in Aviation CML, Royal Netherlands Air Force Simulation and Training Challenges for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Analysts (15175) Lisa Tripp, Ph.D., Elliott Humphrey, Christine Covas-Smith, Ph.D., Jonathan Diemunsch, USAF Air Force Research Laboratory; Mike Garrity, Ph.D., Cullen Jackson, Mike W ED N ES D AY, 2 DEC EMB ER • 1600- 1730 • S 320A Keeney, Ph.D., Sterling Wiggins, Aptima, Inc. Team Building: All for One and One for All Session Chair: Brian Cairns, Moulage Sciences & Training Session Deputy:Beth Pettitt, ARL HRED STTC Assessing the Effects of Virtual Emergency Training on Mine Rescue Team Efficacy (15119) Cassandra Hoebbel, Ph.D., Tim Bauerle, Brendan Macdonald, Launa Mallett, Ph.D., The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Effectiveness of Process Level Feedback at Training Tactical Decision Making (15201) Meredith Carroll, Ph.D., Christina K. Padron, Stephanie Quinn, Ph.D., Glenn Surpris, Brent Winslow, Ph.D., Design Interactive, Inc.; Erica Viklund, Ph.D., Pacific Science and Engineering LEGEND (one or more of the following may appear on this page). The number in parentheses following Paper Title is the ID tracking number. Nominated for Best Paper Award Honorable Mention for Best Paper Award Continuing Education Units (see pg. 12) % Game-related Subject Matter ñ International Author h Medical-related Subject Matter T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Ï Cyber Security Mobile 67 STEM S T E M W O R K F O R C E I N I T I AT I V E Workforce Initiative STEM supports and promotes activities encouraging students’ interest and pursuit in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. STEM Today = Prepared Workforce for Tomorrow In support of STEM and Workforce Development, I/ITSEC sponsors the following programs: • Future Leaders Pavilion • Students at I/ITSEC • Post Graduate Scholarships (Masters and Doctorate) • Simulation Technician Scholarships • Serious Games Showcase & Challenge • I/ITSEC Professional Development Workshops • Central Florida Educators Workshop • Continuing Education Units • America’s Teachers at I/ITSEC • Golf and 5K Fundraiser T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 69 STOP! SEE THE FUTURE FUTURE LEADERS/STUDENTS Future Leaders Pavilion Booth 2681 Tuesday, 1 December 1200 – 1730 Wednesday, 2 December 0930 – 1730 Thursday, 3 December 0930 – 1500 WEDNESDAY SPECIAL SESSION 1030 – 1200 • S210D AWARDS CEREMONY 1345 • Warfighters’ Corner Sta ge Students at I/ITSEC Thursday, 3 December • 0900 – 1400 Over the years, thousands of Central Florida high school students have participated in a unique learning experience by visiting the Exhibitors/Exhibits. The purpose of the I/ITSEC Student Tours is to allow students to experience first-hand, real-world Training, Simulation, and Education solutions that will help bridge the gap between classroom theory and the applied use of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects. Annually, over 600 students, along with 200 school chaperones and volunteer I/ITSEC member escorts, are exposed to special demonstrations and static displays of the Simulation, Training and Education Industry. Students are able to learn about the basic building blocks required to deliver high fidelity modeling and simulation products across a broad range of training environments. Participating in the I/ITSEC Student Tours on Thursday, 3 December, 2015, will give students a complete understanding of how they can apply the STEM related skills they learn in the classroom to highly successful careers in our Industry. To learn more about the I/ITSEC Conference and Student Tours, please contact Dr. Kristy Murray, murrayk@cfl.rr.com. Learning and Leadership are indispensable to each other. The National Training and Simulation Association and the members of I/ITSEC take great pleasure in welcoming you to the Ninth Annual Future Leaders Pavilion and Special Session. We are delighted to host secondary students from such diverse areas as: • Dayton, OH • Lexington Park, MD • Hampton, VA • Orlando, FL • Huntsville, AL • Philadelphia, PA • Latham, NY The students who participate in the Future Leaders Pavilion (FLP) are committed to excellence and are enrolled in engineering, computer sciences, mathematics, or modeling and simulation tracks. Projects presented this year will continue the legacy of excellence built by previous Future Leaders. Please remember to include FLP, located in Booth 2467, during your visits to the exhibit floor. On Thursday at 1030, please lend support to our Future Leaders as they present their projects during their Special Session – “The Future is Now!” Join us again at 1345 at the Warfighters Stage, Booth 2681 for an award ceremony acknowledging the work of our Future Leaders. 70 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E America’s Teachers @ I/ITSEC I/ITSEC has a long history of supporting the education E D U C AT I O N of students and teachers through visits to the conference. Since the America’s Teachers at I/ITSEC program began in 2008, we have hosted teachers from Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Montana, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. As part of I/ITSEC’s efforts to further education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), teachers and administrators from across the country have been invited to attend the conference. The America’s Teachers at I/ITSEC Program consists of an orientation session, attendance at the Modeling and Simulation techPATH, guided tours of the Exhibit Hall, and attendance at tutorials, paper sessions, and special events. This program is supported by the National Training and Simulation Association and its industry members. Educators Workshop to Introduce Simulation into the Physics Classroom – I/ITSEC 2015 than 125 techCAMPs have been delivered to more than 2,100 teachers and 2,500 students. To highlight the thriving Modeling, Simulation & Training (MS&T) sector in the Corridor, techPATH will be hosting two programs during the I/ITSEC conference – one techCAMP for teachers and a techCAMP program for students – to highlight the many technologies involved in MS&T and the related high tech careers available to students that study STEM subjects. Recognizing the need for a trained high tech workforce, The teacher’s workshop will feature guided tours of the the Florida High Tech Corridor Council established its industry exhibits and presentations from well-known experts educational initiative—techPATH. Involving representatives in the field, including representatives from the Institute for from a variety of academic affiliations and high tech Simulation and Training at the University of Central Florida companies, techPATH is “cultivating tomorrow’s workforce” and the National Center for Simulation. Teachers attending in The Corridor’s 23 counties through a number of innovative the special Educators techCAMP will utilize newly gained programs, designed to encourage students to pursue high knowledge and experiences at I/ITSEC to build upon the tech careers. techPATH supports the national objectives for many applications of math and science to help motivate Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). The signature offering of techPATH is The Corridor’s students. Students will participate in a special techCAMP that will techCAMP program. techCAMPs are high tech workshops introduce them to the field of robotics and demonstrate how offered to middle and high school math, science, technology to program a LEGO robot. They will also have an escorted and career education teachers and students, to provide tour of the convention floor where they will be introduced information about the many STEM oriented careers that to the varied work of simulation and robotics in the military, drive the economic growth of the region. Since 1998, more plus interact with an NAO robot. For more information, contact Vicki Morelli at vicki.morelli@floridahightech.com T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 71 SERIOUS GAMES 72 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E STEM Pavilion: Near the Exhibit Hall Lunch Entrance Project Based Learning Exhibitors engages students in active exploration of real-world problems and challenges. Though questioning, inquiry, critical thinking and trial and error, students absorb new knowledge and PROJECT BASED LEARNING STEM – Tomorrow’s Workforce, Today! PROJECT BASED LEARNING (PBL) is a hands-on approach that educational content in a problem-solving context. PBL necessitates that students interweave individual learning concepts and ideas while collaborating and communicating with others. Studies show that not only do students retain more of what they learn and for longer, but they are better able to apply the knowledge in new situations. Just as important, PBL enables students to grasp the relevance of STEM educational content to their world both today and into the future. This in-turn helps fill our workforce pipeline with prospects who are better prepared, more confident and highly engaged to take on careers in the STEM fields. Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn. Chinese Proverb T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 73 25th Annual RADM Fred Lewis I/ITSEC Postgraduate Scholarship Recipients I/ITSEC SCHOLARSHIPS Amelia Kinsella Doctoral Candidate Human Factors Psychology, Clemson University Michael Eady Masters Student Cybersecurity, Johns Hopkins University RADM Fred Lewis, USN (Ret.) President, NTSA • 1995 - 2012 These scholarships have been named the RADM Fred Lewis Postgraduate I/ITSEC Scholarship in honor of the former President of the National Training and Simulation Association (NTSA). IMPORTANT DATES FOR 2016 When to Apply Applications must be postmarked by 20 June 2016. (Don’t Delay!) How to Apply See http://www.iitsec.org/Community/ Education/Pages/Scholarships.aspx for complete application details. Award Announcement 5 August 2016 Post Graduate Scholarships Sean Osmond Masters Student Modeling and Simulation, University of Central Florida Looking for Future Leaders in the Simulation, Training and Education Community. Learn more about the I/ITSEC community at www.iitsec.org Eligibility U.S. Citizens Full-time Masters or Doctoral students (complete undergraduate work by Spring 2016) See Study Disciplines at http://www.iitsec.org/education/studentsandteachers/Pages/Scholarships.aspx Award Amounts $10,000 (Doctoral Candidates) $5,000 (Masters Candidates) Available for Fall 2016 Be our guest at I/ITSEC November 28 – December 2, 2016 Direct Further Inquiries and Provide Submissions Lewis-I/ITSEC Scholarship Program c/o The National Training and Simulation Association 2111 Wilson Boulevard Suite 400 • Arlington, VA 22201-3061 (703) 247-2569 or bmcdaniel@ndia.org Simulator Maintenance Technician Scholarship Programs To promote the study of simulation technology, I/ITSEC continues agreements with Daytona State College (DSC) in Daytona Beach, Florida, and Lake Region State College (LRSC), Devils Lake, North Dakota, to provide a year's funding at each school for a student enrolled in the Simulation Technology program. DSC and LRSC have established themselves as leaders with accredited programs in this field. In addition to the scholarship programs, both schools are interested in acquiring corporate partners willing to provide used simulators, establish intern positions, or consider other means of supporting the programs. Contact us at (703) 247-2569 or bmcdaniel@ndia.org if you are interested in finding out more about scholarship or partnership opportunities. 74 VADM John S. Disher, USN (Ret.) Executive Director, NTSA • 1991-1995 These scholarships have been named the Vice Admiral John S. Disher Simulator Maintenance Technology Scholarship (DSC and LRSC) in honor of the former Executive Director of the National Training and Simulation Association (NTSA). 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Professional Development Workshops Orange County Convention Center, South Concourse Date: Friday, 4 December Times: 0700 Breakfast and registration • AM Sessions 0800 – 1200 • PM Sessions 1300-1700 Who may attend? All registrants of I/ITSEC are welcome to attend. Fees: There is no fee to attend. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS Location: CEU/CLP:Paid I/ITSEC Conference registrants are eligible to receive CEU/CLP credits. If not a paid attendee, a $45 fee will be charged only if you wish to receive the CEU credits. Registration:Preregister via https://secure2.rhq.com/iitsec/iitsec2015/public/index.cgi?track=workshoponly Registrations also accepted on-site during I/ITSEC registration hours. Lunch: On own. Coordinated by University of Central FloridaDivision of Continuing Education. For additional information on these seminars including topical outline and instructor bios, please see: www.ce.ucf.edu/iitsec UCF Continuing Education POC Maria Cherjovsky, Assistant Director, Continuing Education & Regional Campuses Phone Number: 407-882-0260 All Professional Development Workshops are eligible for CEU/CLP credits. (See page 12) P D W1 • R o o m S 330A • 0800 – 1700 Exam Topic Outline. The CMSP exam has been completely revised and refined over the past two years, and new applicants will now have a choice of two tracks — Technical and Presenters: User/Manager — and will take an entirely new exam. The Talib Hussain, Ph.D., Senior Scientist, Raytheon BBN workshop will be taught by charter/pioneer CMSPs who have Technologies; Kelly Pounds, Vice President, IDEAS Learning; been involved in oversight of the CMSP program and/or creVance Souders, Producer, Janus Research ation/revision of the CMSP exam. The workshop will not by Participants will be introduced to key concepts, steps and itself prepare applicants to take the exam, but will provide a processes involved in designing a serious game for learning. thorough overview of exam content and a blueprint for furThrough hands-on activities and working together in groups, ther self-study. participants will design a learning game. Participants will experience each phase of the design process, including identifying the training requirements and learning objectives, creating PD W 3 • Room S330C • 0800 – 1200 an effective story, determining instructional and gaming stratLive-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) egies, and designing key game and instructional mechanics. Interoperability Techniques Central to our approach will be ensuring that any key design decision addresses both gaming and instructional Presenters: considerations. During the workshop, participants will be Edward Powell, Ph.D., Chief Architect and Program Manager introduced to key methods to use and issues to consider when for TENA, Leidos; Randy Saunders, The Johns Hopkins designing a learning game. Groups will share their designs University Applied Physics Lab and discuss their decisions after each phase of design. This workshop will provide an overview of the systems engineering issues with regard to integrating disparate military simulations for analysis, training, testing, and other purposes. P D W 2 • R o o m S 330B • 0800 – 1200 We will discuss the three major interoperability techniques, the Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) standards, the Certified Modeling & Simulation High Level Architecture (HLA) for Modeling and Simulation, Professional (CMSP) Exam Preparation and the Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA), inPresenter: cluding descriptions of their architectures and some of their Mikel Petty, Ph.D., University of Alabama in Huntsville use cases. Recent and planned evolution of each architecture This workshop will provide an overview of the Certified Mod- will be explained. A discussion of how these architectures are eling & Simulation Professional (CMSP) certification program, actually used in the real world and the process for integrating with a particular focus on preparing prospective applicants to disparate systems in a multi-architecture environment will be take the CMSP exam. The workshop will cover the applica- discussed. The format of the workshop will be part lecture tion and examination process (education/ work experience and part informal discussion/question answer. Participants requirements, application fees, how the exam is administered, are encouraged to raise specific topics any time during the etc.), in addition to an in-depth review of the new CMSP workshop. Serious Game Design Tutorial T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 75 PDW4 • S 330D • 0800 – 120 0 Modeling & Simulation for Acquisition PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS Presenter: Rob Lisle, Newport News Shipbuilding Modeling and Simulation (M&S) in Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition programs encompasses a wide variety of technologies, organizations, processes, and best practices. This workshop provides a practical overview of M&S for acquisition, created by professionals experienced in the largest DoD acquisition programs. The workshop begins with a high-level presentation of organizing principles, and then transitions to specific, real-world examples. A guidebook and slides will be provided as handouts for this course. P D W5 • R oom S 330E • 0800 – 1200 Seamless Mobile Learning and Simulations Presenters: David Metcalf, Ph.D., Director, Mixed Emerging Technology Integration Lab, UCF Institute for Simulation and Training; Angela Hamilton, Program Lead, Mixed Emerging Technology Integration Lab, UCF Institute for Simulation and Training Participants will discuss how to promote learning and performance within a mobile workforce that is separated by time, space, and context. The workshop will demonstrate and elaborate on the affordances of mobile simulation for promoting seamless formal and informal learning experiences and increasing human performance. Focus will be on best practices for design, development, and strategy. In addition to ubiquitous mobile content delivery and assessment channels (e-mail, voice, text messages, web, and 76 mobile apps), emerging technologies and capabilities such as context-awareness, mobile 3D, and augmented reality are expanding the potential applications of mobile simulation. Participants will 1) see current government and military examples, 2) explore key technological features and design characteristics unique to mobile, and 3) develop their own mobile strategy capable of bridging formal and informal contexts. The workshop will cover information necessary to build and implement a cohesive design and development strategy for seamless mobile training and simulation and will also include a hands-on exercise. PD W 6 • Room S330F • 0800 – 1 2 0 0 Measuring the Impact and ROI of Training, Simulation, and Education Programs Presenter: Timothy R. Brock, PhD, CPT, ID (S&L+), CEO, The Institute 4 Worthy Performance LLC; Associate, ROI Institute Inc.; Practice Leader, The Institute for Performance Improvement L3C Training, Simulation, and Education programs offer significant value to improve military preparedness and mission outcomes. Yet, it is now necessary to add bottom line and ROI funding justifications to support government mandates for decreased costs, higher value through improved efficiencies and outcomes, and expanded, sustainable capabilities to compensate for continuing funding decreases. This workshop introduces a ROI Methodology to show value in terms that government, military, and corporate executives understand and desire to make initial and ongoing funding decisions. 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Exhibit Hall Attendee Luncheon Lunch will be served Tuesday - Thursday at 1200. You must enter & exit luncheon through the Exhibit Hall. Full Conference registrants will receive lunch tickets with their registration materials. Exhibitors and Visitors may HALL HAPPENINGS purchase a ticket for $25.00 at the main Registration Station. Lunch tickets are dated; you must present the current day’s lunch ticket for entry. Connections Lounge & Grill Stop by and relax in the Connections Lounge & Grill for a bite to eat or a refreshing drink and then connect to your email or review the I/ITSEC program online to plan your next move at the conference. Connections Lounge & Grill will be located in Booth 100, South A Hall. Show Management Office Room S220A • The Show Management Office will be staffed during show hours for all questions regarding booth space, rules, regulations, exhibitor locators, security and late/early passes. Registration will not be made available at the Show Management Office. National Training & Simulation Association (NTSA) Booth 1880 • The National Training and Simulation Association (NTSA) is America’s premier organization representing the interests of the modeling and simulation community. As such, it serves as a constant point of contact for government, academia, industry, research organizations and the military to exchange information, share knowledge, align business interests, and in general stimulate the growth and overall dynamism of the industry. Service Booths PEO STRI 1433 PM TRASYS 1533 NAWCTSD 439/1439 USAF1539 International Pavilions Canada727 Netherlands2273 European1980 Healthcare Pavilion Society for Simulation in Healthcare 2073-2185 Recognizing that simulation represents a paradigm shift in health care education, SSH promotes improvements in simulation technology, educational methods, practitioner assessment, and patient safety that promote better patient care and can improve patient outcome. Other participants in the Healthcare Pavilion: Laerdal Medical, TraumaFX, Gaumard and Meadows Medical. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 77 Innovation Showcase P Exhibit Hall – Booth 2287 HALL HAPPENINGS resentations within the Innovation Showcase are led by cutting-edge exhibiting companies that are knowledgeable on the various subject matter within the M&S industry. Mark your calendar to stop by one of the 30-minute sessions to hear what is new and exciting in M&S! Be sure to check out the official I/ITSEC website and onsite signage for updated participants. (As of 30 October 2015) Monday, 30 November 1515 Mobile Target – Meet Sheldon Caliente SimIS 1645 Innovation in Projecting the Visible Color Space Digital Projection Tuesday, 1 December 1230 CBRN/WMD Simulation in Live Training Environment Argon Electronics (UK) Ltd. 1315 Recipe for Driving Effective, Efficient and Tinely Training BNH Expert Software 1400 Game Engine Use for Simulations: What’s New in 2015 in Unity, Unreal and More Forge FX Simulations 1445 The Future of Making Things – Training and Simulation Autodesk 1530 Making Motion Available to all Simulators: Optimize Motion Cueing to Augment Trainees Simulator Adoption and Preparedness D-Box Wednesday, 2 December 78 1000 Building a Beautiful World: Using Blueberry 3D and VR-Forces to Create ContentRich Terrains VT MÄK 1130 Vortex Dynamics for Simulation-based Training for Ground Vehicles and Heavy Equipment CM Labs Simulations 1345 Adobe Learning 2025 – Beyond the Traditional LMS Adobe 1430 How to Build a Simulation & Training Cloud Using Open International Standards Pitch Technologies 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Exhibitor Networking Event B Tu e s d a y, 1 De c e m b e r • 1700 - 1830 • E x h ib it H a lls HALL HAPPENINGS e sure to kick off I/ITSEC 2015 with a stop by one of the participating booths at the I/ITSEC Exhibitor Networking Event. What a great way to view the latest technology while networking with exhibitors and your fellow attendees. Be sure to check out the official I/ITSEC website and onsite signage for updated participants. (As of 30 October 2015) Booth # Company 313 Unreal Engine 4 429 Aptima, Inc. 449 Oakwood Worldwide 835 Alion Science and Technology 840 LSI, Inc. 1101 TRU Simulation + Training 1273SAIC 1513Barco 1620 AMSEC and Newport News Shipbuilding 1734CAE 1880NTSA 1933 Ravenswood Solutions/SRI International 1980ETSA 2009 Adayana Government Group 2039QinetiQ 2149 Esterline BVBA 2200 Soar Technology, Inc. 2401 Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH & Co. KG 2411Leidos 2419 Ruag Schweiz AG, Ruag Defence 2461 The DiSTI Corporation T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 79 Warfighters Corner T HALL HAPPENINGS hroughout the week the Warfighters Corner will serve as the stage for many events. See the list below, and go to the referenced pages of this Program Guide for further details about the specific presentation or program. Monday, 30 November 1530 – 1700 DoD Small Business Programs: Mr. Kenyata Wesley, SES Tuesday, 1 December 1300 – 1330 PEO STRI TSIS Update: Director, Field Operations, COL Bill Canaley 1330 – 1400 PEO STRI TSIS Update: PM TRADE, COL Vince Malone 1400 – 1430 PEO STRI TSIS Update: Contracting Command-Orlando, Mr. Joe Giunta 1530 – 1700 “Tip of the Spear” Warfighter Briefings Wednesday, 2 December 1030 – 1200 “Tip of the Spear” Warfighter Briefings 1300 – 1330 PEO STRI TSIS Update: PM ITTS, COL Rick Haggerty 1330 – 1400 PEO STRI TSIS Update: PM ITE, COL Ron Gaddy 1400 – 1430 PEO STRI TSIS Update: FMS Update, Mr. Dale Whittaker 1500 – 1530 STEM Proclamation: Orange County Mayor Teresa Jacobs 1600 – 1730 Hiring America’s Service Members: DoD Skillbridge Forum Thursday, 3 December 1030 – 1200 “Tip of the Spear” Warfighter Briefings 1300 – 1330 Serious Games Awards 1345 – 1415 Future Leaders Pavilion Award 80 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E MONDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 1430 - 1600 DISASTER STRIKES Addressing 23 Years of LVC Status Quo HALL HAPPENINGS TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 1600 - 1730 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE WEDNESDAY, 2 DECMBER 1030 - 1200 COUNTERING EXPLOITATION WEDNESDAY, 2 DECMBER 1600 - 1730 SECURING THE SKIES THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 1030 - 1200 OVERMATCH: FORWARD FROM THE SEA BOOTH 339 AND OTHER FLOOR LOCATIONS FL1 Operation Blended Warrior (OBW) I n this Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) Special Event, industry members and government organizations are joining forces to create an LVC environment for the purpose of: 1) showcasing their capabilities, and 2) collecting data on challenges encountered during their efforts. The relative effort to establish an LVC event versus the benefit of, or the effort to conduct the LVC event is out of kilter; the former takes considerably more time and effort, and too little is being done to address this discrepancy. This year, Operation Blended Warrior will provide attendees with glimpses of the state of LVC capabilities constrained to I/ITSEC confines, as well as insights into the number, degree and priority of challenges encountered. This year’s concentration is on standards, after action review, and traditional LVC and cyber-contested environments using a Black Swan (humanitarian assistance) event as a backdrop. In future years, additional complexities and concentrations will be added to the event construct — both to showcase additional capabilities, and to tease out additional challenges that need to be addressed. BY WORKING TOGETHER, NTSA, INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL BELIEVE SOLUTIONS CAN BE FOUND TO IMPROVE THE CREATION AND EXECUTION OF LVC EVENTS. Check your Meeting Bags or stop by Booth 339 for a full listing of the participants and the programs to be demonstrated. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 81 (As of 30 October 2015) NTSA Sustaining Member • NTSA Regular Member • NTSA Associate Member 2015 EXHIBITORS 3D Perception 1920 4C Strategies 1917 AAADA727 Acme Worldwide Enterprises, Inc. 713 Adacel Systems, Inc. 1221 Adayana, Inc. 2009 Adobe Systems, Inc. 455 Advanced IT Concepts, Inc. 1167 Advanced Simulation Technology, Inc. 2139 Aechelon Technology, Inc. 1722 AECOM 1070 AEgis Technologies 1901 Aero Simulation, Inc. 813 Aerotronics 248, 1135 Air National Guard Trainer Development 1562 Airbus Defence and Space 1171 Alelo Inc. 2034 Alion Science and Technology 835 AlphaPixel415 American Society of Civil Engineers 2874 AMSEC a Subsidiary of Huntington Ingalls Industries 1620 AMST-Systemtechnik GmbH 2719 Applied Research Associates, Inc. 2271 Aptima, Inc. 429, 690 Argon Electronics 451 Arrington Research, Inc. 413 Aruba Networks 507 AVT Simulation 2049 BAE Systems 1961 Bagira Systems, Ltd. 1862 Barco 287, 1513 Battlespace Simulations 1249 B-Design3D2028 Beijing Sunheart Simulation Technology Co., Ltd. 417 BGI, LLC 448 Bihrle Applied Research Inc. 2641 BIONATICS2129 B-Line Medical 863 Blue Marble Geographics 2625 BNH Expert Software, Inc. 2748 Boeing Company 1700 Bohemia Interactive Simulations 2248 Bosch Rexroth 749 Bowhead/UIC Government Services 486 Brazilian Defense and Security Industries Association 1080 Bugeye Technologies 712 C2 Technologies, Inc. 701 CAE 1734 Calienté SimIS 533 Calytrix 490, 2459 Camber Corporation 1225 Canon USA, Inc. 2213 Capstone Corporation 2156 Carley Corporation 586, 2227 CAST Navigation LLC 622 Central Florida STEM Education Council 2772 CEVIANS LLC 2653 Charles River Analytics 517 Christie Digital Systems 171, 2627 82 Clear-Com1258 Close Air Solutions 1249 CM Labs Simulations 707 Cole Engineering Services, Inc. 181 Concurrent 1908 Connections Café and Lounge 100, 132 Control Products Corporation 1159 Cranfield Aerospace, Ltd. 1973 Crestron Electronics 1165 CSC275 Cubic 249, 1748 Cyber Security and Information Systems 982 Information Analysis Center (CSIAC) Cybernet Systems Corporation 1162 D2 TEAM-Sim 2664 Da-Lite Screen Company 755 David Clark Company Incorporated 880 D-BOX Technologies, Inc. 1026 Dedicated Computing 2208 Defense News Media Group 2629 Delaware Resource Group of Oklahoma, LLC 627 Department of Defense STEM Development 2884 Program Office Design Interactive, Inc. 621 Diamond Visionics 2101 DIGINEXT721 Digital Projection 970 Dignitas Technologies 281 Displays & Optical Technologies, Inc. 1926 DiSTI Corporation 2461 DMSCO1280 Doron Precision Systems, Inc. 433 Draken International 459 Draper, Inc. 1064 Drew Defense GmbH 1972 Drexel University MS in Medical and 2182 Healthcare Simulation Program Driven Technologies, Inc. 1931 DRS Technologies 2133 E2M Technologies B.V R 1723 EBC Electronics Corp 560 EDM, Ltd. 960 EDN Aviation 716 Eduworks Corporation 1873 Elbit Systems, Ltd. 2000 Electric Picture 1288 Electro-Optical Imaging, Inc. 521 ELM333 Embry Riddle Aeronautical University 2735 eMDee Technology, Inc. 2633 Engility 2449 Engineering & Computer Simulations, Inc. 1463 Engineering & Manufacturing Services, Inc. (EMS) 512 Enovative Technologies 2031 Envitia2754 Epson America 2727 ESP Inc. 1914 Esri301 Esterline 2149 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E NTSA Sustaining Member • NTSA Regular Member • NTSA Associate Member Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH & Co. KG 2401 L-3 Communications 1449 Laerdal Medical 2073 Laser Ammo 775 Leidos 2411 Lockheed Martin 2235 Look Solutions USA, Ltd 664 Louisiana State University, Transformational 513 Technologies & Cyber Research Center LSI, Inc. 840 M3 Solutions Technologies 807 Marathon Targets 1915 Marine Corps System Command (PM TRASYS) 1533 MASA Group 2224 Meadows Medical Supply LLC 2180 Meggitt Training Systems 1238 Melrose Center at Orange County Library System 2872 MetaVR1249 Mid Florida Tech 2665 MONCH PUBLISHING GROUP 453 Moog 471, 1900 Motion Reality, Inc. 321 MS&T Magazine – Halldale Media 2060 NAF – Central Florida NAF Academies 2789 Nakuuruq Solutions 187 NASA2473 National Center for Simulation 2160 National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) 1880 National Research Council Canada 2026 National Training & Simulation Association (NTSA) 1880 NATO2619 NAWCTSD and U.S. Naval Academy 2769 nCASE–Materials World Modules 2765 NCS Technologies, Inc. 665 NCS/Orlando Tech 2771 Netherlands Simulation Pavilion 2273 Newport News Shipbuilding 1620 Nida Corporation 612 Northrop Grumman 1949 Nova Technologies 581 NSC2465 Oak Grove Technologies 590 Oakwood Worldwide 449 Oculus801 ODU (MSVE Department) 2172 Operation Blended Warrior (OBW) 339 OPTIS North America 2064 Orange County CTE 2785 Orange County Public Schools 2787 Orion Technologies 868 Orlando Science Center Hands-On STEM Activities 2773 Orlando Science Schools 2775 Oshkosh Speciality Vehicles 401 Panasonic862 Panel Products, Inc. 874 Paramount Panels, Inc. 554 Parsons S 1121 PatchPlus Consulting, Inc. 525 Patriot Products LLC 508 T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 2015 EXHIBITORS ETC 2127 E-Tech Simulations 529 ETSA1980 EUROSATORY2282 Evertz762 Extron Electronics 1127 eyevis GmbH 1171 F2Si175 FAAC, Inc. 2471 Fain Models, Simulation Systems 1973 Fidelity Technologies 1769 FIRST Robotics 2792 FlightSafety International 1401 ForgeFX Simulations 1266 Frasca International, Inc. 2649 Future Leaders Pavilion 2681 Gaumard Scientific 761 General Digital Corporation 329 General Dynamics 475, 1413 George Mason University Serious Games Institute 409 Georgia Tech Research Institute 2214 Geoweb3d2068 Global Defence Technology Virtual GovEvents516 Great Minds in STEM 2864 Guild Associates, Inc. 809 Hampden Engineering Corporation 1927 HapTech Inc. 561 Harris Corporation 765 Heartwood Inc. A 686 Hi-Dow514 ICF International 1814 IEEE Xplore Digital Library 1260 IHSE USA, LLC 1165 Immersive Display Solutions, Inc. 1580 INDIENOMICOM2886 Indra 1226 Industrial Smoke & Mirrors 1712 Inert Products LLC 2659 Innovation Showcase 1180 Institute for Simulation and Training 2781, 2783 Intelligent Decisions, Inc. 1036 Inter-Coastal Electronics Inc. 1925 IPKeys Technologies 2469 Israel Aerospace Industries, Ltd. 1762 ITEC606 J.F. Taylor, Inc. 1471 JHT, Inc. 1234 JRL Ventures, Inc. 2032 JRM Technologies 2015 Jupiter Systems 407 JVC Professional Visual Systems 1421 Katmai607 Kentucky Trailer Technologies 549 Key Electronics 523 KGS-TraumaFX2181 KMI Media Group 1969 Kongsberg Maritime Simulation Inc. 1000 Kratos Technology & Training Solutions 481, 1012 83 NTSA Sustaining Member • NTSA Regular Member • NTSA Associate Member 2015 EXHIBITORS Photo Research, Inc. 864 Pitch Technologies 1020 PLEXSYS Interface Products, Inc. 2435 PLW Modelworks 548 Pocket Nurse 2184 Polhemus 2115 Power Innovations Int’l Inc. 1113 Pragmatics, Inc. 2269 Pratt & Miller Engineering 2635 Presagis 375, 821 Project Lead the Way 2770 Protobox LLC 1236 Pulau Corporation 2427 Q4 Services 2069 QinetiQ 2039 Quadrant Simulation Systems, Inc. 1909 Quantum 3D, Inc. 2161, 2170 RAFAEL2750 Rapid Prototyping Services 349 Rave Computer 1139 Ravenswood Solutions 1933 RAYDON Corporation 1048 Raytheon 1213 REALTIMEVISUAL 1032 RGB Spectrum 1158 Rheinmetall Defence 2601 Robotics Club at UCF 2880 Rockwell Collins 2201 RPA Electronic Solutions, Inc. 735 RSI Visual Systems 2120 RUAG Defence 2419 SA Photonics 806 Saab Defense and Security 1939 Safety Training Systems, Inc. 1480 SAIC 1273 Scalable Display Technologies 1170 SCALABLE Network Technologies 613 Sea Box, Inc. 2655 SeaPerch2693 Sensics1161 SensoMotoric Instruments, Inc. 764 Senspex, Inc. 2081 Serious Games Challenge 2481 Serious Simulations LLC 771 SGB Enterprises, Inc. 2759 Shephard Media 869 Shooting Range Industries, LLC 2188 SimiGon, Inc. 2749 SIMmersion LLC 1008 SimPhonics, Inc. 2109 Simsoft618 SimSTAFF Technical Services 881 Simtek, Inc. 620 Simthetiq964 Simulation and Control Technologies 501 SMART EYE AB 1264 Soar Technology, Inc. 2200 Society for Simulation in Healthcare 2183 Sonalysts 403 84 Sony Electronics, Inc. 848 Source Code B46 2890 Sterling Global Operations, Inc. 772 Stirling Dynamics 2257 Stottler Henke Associates 1009 Strategic Systems, Inc. 307 Symbolic Displays, Inc. 663 SYNERCO S.A. 1484 Tactical Communications Group 552 Tactical Micro 1058 Talon Simulations 616 Tannas Electronic Displays, Inc. 1788 TAPE 1932 TEC Simulation 515 Tech Sassy Girlz 2888 Tech Wizards, Inc. 2080 Technical Sales & Applications/Pelican Products 506 Ternion Corporation 601 TerraSim Inc. 2248 Texas Advanced Optics 872 Textron Systems 1101 Thales 2221 Theissen Training Systems, Inc. 2612 Third Dimension Technologies 1033 Tobii Technology, Inc. 1163 Trailer Transit, Inc 870 Transas Americas, Inc. 2021 TrianGraphics964 TRU Simulation + Training 1101 Turning Technologies 808 U. S. Jaclean, Inc. 861 UCF Center for Initiatives in STEM (iSTEM) 2870 UFA, Inc. 2741 United Electronic Industries (UEI) 2220 Unreal Engine 4 313 U.S. Army PEO STRI 149, 1433 U.S. Navy / NAWCTSD 439, 1439 U.S. News STEM Solutions 2752 USAA774 USAF Training Systems Product Group 1539 Veraxx Engineering Corporation 1149 VirTra Systems, Inc. 2261 Virtual Motion Labs 1262 VT MÄK 381, 827 Wacom558 WARFIGHTERS CORNER 2280 Westar Display Technologies, Inc. 980 WITTENSTEIN Aerospace & Simulation 1780 World Wide Technology 509 WorldViz2201 WUCF2791 Wyle624 ZedaSoft, Inc. 2435 Zel Technologies, LLC 1021 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Committees Conference Committee COMMITTEES Service Executives CAPT Wes Naylor, USN, Commanding Officer, NAWCTSD Col Walter Yates, USMC, Program Manager, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Col Dan Marticello, USAF, Director, Simulators Division, Air Force Materiel Command MG Jon Maddux, USA, Program Executive Officer for PEO STRI OSD/Joint ExecutiveFrank C. DiGiovanni, Director, Force Readiness and Training Service Principals Diana Teel, NAWCTSD Martin Bushika, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Tony DalSasso, USAF Simulators Division Traci Jones, U.S. Army PEO STRI OSD PrincipalSae Schatz, Ph.D., Director, Advanced Distributed Learning Conference Chair Brent Smith, Engineering & Computer Simulations, Inc. Deputy Conference Chair Janet Spruill, Hickory Ground Solutions, LLC (HGS) Program ChairDavid Hutchings, Raydon Corporation Deputy Program Chair Elizabeth Biddle, Ph.D., The Boeing Company Subcommittee Chairs Education Chris Bryant, Operation Smile Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies Steve Gordon, Ph.D., Georgia Tech Research Institute Human Performance Analysis and Engineering Jennifer McNamara, BreakAway, Ltd. Policy, Standards, Management and AcquisitionTom Yanoschik, SAIC Simulation Matt Spruill, Engineering & Computer Simulations Training Felicia Douglis, FRD Solutions, LLC Best Paper Committee Chair Susan Sherman, NAWCTSD Tutorial Board Chair Robert Richbourg, Ph.D., Institute for Defense Analyses Best Tutorial Committee Chair Katrina Ricci, NAWCTSD Education and Training Advisor VADM Al Harms, USN (Ret.), UCF, VP Emeritus Scholarship Committee Chair Ron Smits, Engility Corporation Director for International ProgramsK. Denise Threlfall, Ph.D., Kratos Defense & Security Solutions Strategic Planning and STEM Committee ChairLinda Brent, Ed.D., The ASTA Group, Inc. Special Event Coordinator Benjamin Bell, Ph.D., Aqru Research and Technology, LLC Website and Social Media Advisor John Killilea, NAWCTSD Conference Sponsor National Training and Simulation Association President RADM James Robb, USN (Ret.) Coordinator Barbara McDaniel Exhibits and Sponsorships Debbie Langelier, CEM Advisor CAPT Nelson P. Jackson, USN (Ret.) Media Relations/Communications John Williams Operations Len Kravitz, LRK Associates, Inc. Protocol Coordinator Steve Detro Historians Carol Denton and Allen Collier Veterans Coordinator DeLloyd Voorhees, General Dynamics Information Systems Council of Chairs The Council of Chairs is a special advisory group to the NTSA Sponsor and to the I/ITSEC Committee organization. The exclusive membership comprises the previous I/ITSEC Conference chairs. Drawing on their cumulative experience, these leaders provide a unique perspective and advice for the ongoing mission of I/ITSEC. 1979A.W. Herzog (Deceased) and G.V. (Vince) Amico 1980 Robert W. Layne 1981 Kurt Merl 1982 James A. Gardner, Ph.D. 1983 John Todd (Deceased) 1984Ralph T. Davis (Deceased) 1985 John W. Hammond 1986 Rodney S. Rougelot 1987 David P. Crane (Deceased) 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Thomas E. Sitterley, Ph.D. Arthur L. Banman Steve Selcho Donald M. Campbell Jerry Jerome J.D. (Jack) Drewett G.P. (Pres) McGee Judith Riess, Ph.D. Ed Ward 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Dennis Shockley Jim Cooksey Stan Aronberg (Deceased) Ron Johnson (Deceased) Debbie L. Berry Paul Bernhardt Bill Walsh Buck Leahy Steve Swaine T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Steve Detro Amy Henninger, Ph.D. Don Currie DeLloyd Voorhees, Jr. Jim Wall, Ph.D. Mike Genetti, Ph.D. Amy Motko Cyndi Turner Ron Smits 85 Education Chair: COMMITTEES Christopher Bryant Operation Smile Deputy Chair: Jan Brown CAE USA Emerging Concepts & Innovative Technologies Chair: Steve Gordon, Ph.D. Georgia Tech Research Institute Deputy Chair: nya Andrews, Ph.D. A Erudition Corporation Human Performance Analysis and Engineering Chair: Jennifer McNamara BreakAway, Ltd. Deputy Chair: Kelly Hale, Ph.D. Design Interactive, Inc. 86 Thomas Archibald, IDSI Martin Bink, Ph.D., U.S. Army Research Insititute Chuck Breed, Zenetex Anthony Carbonari, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Sally Carter, Air Force Air Education & Training Command Claudia Clark, Ph.D., NETC Ed Degnan, Ph.D., AFAMS Nina Diebler, Serco Inc. David Fautua, Joint Staff J7 Mark Friedman, Adayana Government Group Liz Gehr, Ph.D., The Boeing Company Lewis Harris, Booz|Allen|Hamilton, Inc. Scott Harris, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Jeff Kissinger, Ph.D., Rollins College Adelle Lynch, Rockwell Collins Pres McGee, ZedaSoft, Inc. Ellen Menaker, Ph.D., IDSI Klaine Nedoroscik, Camber Corporation David Olsen, Ph.D., Engility Corporation Kara Orvis, Ph.D., Aptima Tiffany Parrish, NAWCTSD Robert “Buddha” Snyder, WBB, Inc. Robert Sottilare, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC Brian Stensrud, Ph.D., Soar Technology, Inc. Suzy Sutton, Air Force Air Education & Training Command Jim Threlfall, C2 Technologies, Inc. Brian Vogt, U.S. Army TRADOC JoAnn Wesley, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Jay White, Department of Homeland Security Scott Ariotti, The DiSTI Corporation Stu Armstrong, QinetiQ John Aughey, The Boeing Company Keith Biggers, Ph.D., Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station Paul Bogard, USAF Simulators Division Aaron Burciaga Leslie Dubow, Veterans Health Administration SimLEARN Ba Duong, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS John Dzenutis, The Boeing Company Michael Finnern, Engility Corporation Nick Giannias, CAE Kent Gritton, JTIEC/NAWCTSD Jeff Grubb, NAVAIRSYSCOM Susan Harkrider, RDECOM CERDEC NVESD Brian Holmes, The AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. James (Josh) Jackson, SAIC Joan Johnston, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC Ryan McAlinden, USC/ICT Matthew Morse, USMC MAGTFTC Jennifer Murphy, Ph.D., Quantum Improvements Consulting, LLC Brian Overy, Diamond Visionics Constance Perry, U.S. Army PEO STRI Luis Pineiro, AFRL Susan Sherman, NAWCTSD Dennis Shockley, Motion Analysis Corporation Paul Thurkettle, NATO HQ SACT Luis E. Velazquez, MARCORSYSCOM SIAT Jeff Wakefield, USAF 505th Distributed Warfare Group Eric Weisel, Ph.D., Old Dominion University Jennifer Arnold, Booz|Allen|Hamilton, Inc. Kristen Barrera, Air Force Research Laboratory Maureen Bergondy-Wilhelm, NAWCTSD Mary Driskel, NAWCTSD Fred Fleury, ZedaSoft Michael Genetti, Ph.D. Rockwell Collins Simulation & Training Solutions Bill Gerber, Ph.D., WJ Gerber Consulting Todd Glenn, FAAC, Inc. Matthew Hackett, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC Robert Hester, Ph.D., University of Mississippi Medical Center Glenn Hodges, Ph.D., JAMSD Eric Jarabak, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Randy Jensen, Stottler Henke Associates, Inc. Sherrie Jones, Ph.D., MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Amit Kapadia, U.S. Army PEO STRI C3T Ingrid Mellone, Camber Corporation Mike Merritt, NAWCTSD Steve Monson, The Boeing Company Susan Myers, Ph.D., ManTech International Corporation Paul Phillips, ASC/WNS Elaine Raybourn, Ph.D., Sandia National Laboratories, ADL Initiative John Schlott, L-3 Communications Jerry Stahl, Cypress International Kendy Vierling, Ph.D., USMC TECOM Dennis Vincenzi, Ph.D., ERAU Worldwide Alice Wakefield, USAF 705th Combat Training Squadron 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Chair: Tom Yanoschik SAIC Deputy Chair: Chuck Secard Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training Randal Allen, Ph.D., Lone Star Peter Bavesaro, MARCORSYSCOM AC ALPS Phil Brown, D.M., NORAD-USNORTHCOM J7 Craig Dorrans, NAVAIR PMA 205 Gregory Dougherty, NAWCTSD Jan Drabczuk, JD Defense Solutions, LLC Sam Fragapane, AFAMS Richard Grohs, USAF HQ Air Combat Command Cynthia Harrison, U.S. Army PEO STRI Kevin Hulme, Ph.D., University at Buffalo Tara Kilcullen, Raydon Corporation John Lynch, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Pete Marion, TMST Consultants Simulation Rob Matthews, NAWCTSD Karen Pogoloff, MTS Technologies, Inc. Jeffrey A. Raver, SAIC Emilie Reitz, Alion Science & Technology Larry Rieger, SAIC Robby Robson, Ph.D., Eduworks Corporation Elizabeth Root, i Solutions and Results, Inc. Ramona Shires, Education Programs & Support, Inc. Craig Siefert, USAF Simulators Division Harry Sotomayor, U.S. Army PEO STRI Brett Telford, MCMSMO Mary Trier, Capital Communications & Consulting Paul Watson, U.S. Army PEO STRI Angela Alban, SIMETRI Lisa Jean Bair, SAIC Chair: Brad Cope, NAWCTSD Matt Spruill Engineering & Computer Randy Crowe, Ph.D., Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training Simulations, Inc. Steve Detro Ron Dionne, FLETC Deputy Chair: Robert Dixon, U.S. Army PEO STRI Carla Cropper Gerald Dreggors, Northrop Grumman Corporation Rockwell Collins Simulation & Training Michael Eady, USMC TECOM Solutions Bradley Ehrhardt, NAWCTSD Mike Flanagan, CACI-Federal Luis Garcia, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Jerry Gordon, Cubic Global Defense Corporation Toni Hawkins-Scribner, The Air University, USAF Scott Hooper, Havok, an Intel Company Gordon King, Intelligent Decisions, Inc. Bob Kleinhample, SAIC Favio Lopez, Trideum Corporation David Picinich, SOCOM James Reynolds, MARCORSYSCOM SIAT Tim Ringler, AFLCMC/WNSEB Roy Scrudder, The University of Texas at Austin, Applied Research Laboratories Gregory Sidor, AFRL Mark Soodeen, CAE Teresita Sotomayor, Ph.D., ARL HRED STTC Brent Terwilliger, Ph.D., Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Karen Williams, U.S. Army PEO STRI Training Brian Kemper, U.S. Army PEO STRI Anne Little, Ph.D., Addx Corporation Paul Lyon, Esterline Simulation Visual Systems Amy Motko, Carley Corporation Michael O’Connor, Trideum Corporation Koren Odermann, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS Beth Pettitt, ARL HRED STTC Sowmya Ramachandran, Ph.D., Stottler Henke Associates, Inc. Damon Regan, Ph.D., The Tolliver Group Bill “Roto” Reuter, R-Squared Solutions, LLC Don Snyder, NAWCTSD Lisa Tripp, Ph.D., USAF 711 Human Performance Wing Robert Wallace, USAF Air Combat Command Chair: Felicia Douglis FRD Solutions, LLC Deputy Chair: Eliot Winer, Ph.D. Iowa State University Mike Aldinger, Northrop Grumman Corporation Jeffrey Beaubien, Ph.D., Aptima, Inc. Amy Bolton, Ph.D., Office of Naval Research Daniel Cain, OPNAV N98 Brian Cairns, Moulage Sciences & Training, LLC Tom Casey, USAF Simulators Division Kerri Chik, TiER1 Performance Solutions Susan Coleman, Ph.D., Intelligent Decision Systems, Inc. Javier "Jeff" Covelli, Ph.D., CMSP, PMP, Computer Sciences Corporation Gabriel Diaz, USMC Warfighting Laboratory Graham Fleener, U.S. Army PEO STRI Bob Heinlein, 3D Systems Corporation Nathan Jones, MARCORSYSCOM PM TRASYS T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T COMMITTEES Policy, Standards, Management, and Acquisition 87 International Programs SPECIAL TEAMS Director K. Denise Threlfall, Ph.D., Kratos Defense & Security Solutions Deputy Coordinator Cathy Matthews, Matthews Systems Engineering, Inc. Member Michael Weber, Arore Corporation Operations/Protocol Chair Len Kravitz, LRK Associates, Inc. Deputy Chairs Operations Jim Pohlen, Pulau Corporation Bruce Schwanda, B.A.S. Associates, LLC Deputy Chair Protocol Steve Detro Members Mike Armstrong, Pulau Corporation Jan Baka, Electronic Consulting Services, Inc. Lee Barnes Richard Boyd, Szl.it, Inc. Catherine Emerick, QinetiQ Training and Simulation, Inc. Carol Denton Charlie Frye, Camber Corporation Jim Godwin, The Tolliver Group, Inc. Steve Golberg, Ph.D. Marge Hadbavny Bill Hornsby, A. Harold & Associates, LLC Zach Johnson, Booz|Allen|Hamilton, Inc. Ed Kulakowski, OT Training Solutions, Inc. Mike Motko, QinetiQ Training and Simulation, Inc. Annie Patenaude, AMP Analytics Skip Vibert, Innovation Transformation Consulting Sam Worrell Serious Games Showcase & Challenge IPT Chair Lisa Scott Holt, Ph.D., Intelligent Automation, Inc.. Deputy Chair Wendy Williams, NAWCTSD Members Jennie Ablanedo, STTC, University of Central Florida Stu Armstrong, QinetiQ, Inc. Brian Chan, University of Central Florida Karen Cooper, Ph.D., NAWCAD Seth Crofton, SqwishLand, Inc. Leslie Dubow, Veterans Health Administration SimLEARN Mark Friedman, Adayana Government Group 88 Dolly Rairigh Glass, Capital Communications & Consulting Kent Gritton, JTIEC/NAWCTSD Gregg Lagnese, Autodesk Adelle Lynch, Rockwell Collins David Martz, BroadReach Strategies Jennifer McNamara, BreakAway Games Stacy Pierce, Rockwell Collins Elaine Raybourn, Ph.D., Sandia National Laboratories/ADL Initiative Trey Reyher Erik Sand, Junyo Pete Schrider, Schrider Consulting Scott Shiffert, Hewlett-Packard Steve Slosser, JTIEC/NAWCTSD Juliana Slye, Government Business Results, LLC Brent Smith, Engineering & Computer Simulations, Inc. Peter Smith, Ph.D., University of Central Florida Vance Souders, JANUS Research Group Matt Spruill, Engineering & Computer Simulations, Inc. Stephen Stewart, Evviva Games Shane Taber, Engineering & Computer Simulations, Inc. K. Denise Threlfall, Ph.D., Kratos Defense & Security Solutions Mary Trier, Capital Communications & Consulting Greg Trnka, Booz Allen Hamilton Michael Woodman, Ph.D., Bohemia Interactive Simulations Special Events Committee Chair Benjamin Bell, Ph.D., Aqru Research and Technology, LLC Deputy Chair Kara Orvis, Ph.D., Aptima Members Warfighters’ Corner DeLloyd Voorhees, General Dynamics Information Technology I/ITSEC Fellows Robert Lutz, The Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Lab Robert Richbourg, Ph.D., Institute for Defense Analyses Margaret Loper, Ph.D., Georgia Tech Research Institute Michael Genetti, Ph.D., Rockwell Collins Simulations Training Solutions Operations Liaison Len Kravitz, LRK Associates, Inc. STEM Committee Chair Linda Brent, Ed.D., The ASTA Group, LLC; NTSA, Strategic Planning Members Serious Games Kent Gritton, JTIEC/NAWCTSD Future Leaders Pavilion Ann Friel Students at I/ITSEC Kristy Murray, Ed.D, Summit Strategic Consulting Scholarships Ron Smits, Engility Corporation CEU/Professional Development Workshops Debbie Berry, Lockheed Martin Maria Cherjovksy, University of Central Florida Continuing Education Jennifer McNamara, BreakAway Games America’s Teachers at I/ITSEC Margaret Loper, Ph.D., Georgia Tech Research Institute STEM Pavilion Project Based Learning Exhibits Robert Seltzer, NAWCTSD Teacher Tours and Training Robert Seltzer, NAWCTSD TechPATH Lynn Sand, Skybridge Tactical Eileen Smith, University of Central Florida Tutorial Board Chair Robert Richbourg, Ph.D., Institute for Defense Analyses Deputy Chair David Milewski, Booz|Allen|Hamilton Members Charles Cohen, Ph.D., Cybernet Systems Corporation James Coolahan, Ph.D., Coolahan Associates, LLC Catherine Emerick, QinetiQ Luis Miguel Encarnação, Ph.D., ACT, Inc. Michael Freeman, Ed.D., MW Freeman Solutions Lisa Scott Holt, Ph.D., Intelligent Automation, Inc. Zach Johnson, Booz|Allen|Hamilton, Inc. Margaret Loper, Ph.D., Georgia Tech Research Institute Robert Lutz, The Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Lab Thomas Mastaglio, Ph.D., MYMIC LLC Denise Nicholson, Ph.D., Soar Technology Inc. Katrina Ricci, Ph.D., NAWCTSD Leah Rowe, Ph.D., AFRL Don Sine, Ph.D., Dickieson Projects, Inc. Jim Wall, Ph.D., Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Conference Information About Registration WHAT DO THE REGISTRATION FEES COVER? International registrants will have special registration stations. More details will be provided to each group, but be sure and In addition to Tutorials, Papers, Special Events and Workshops, watch for signage pointing to these areas. R E G I S T R AT I O N I N F O R M AT I O N registration fees cover Continuing Education Units (CEUs), Lunches (T-W-Th), Coffee Breaks (T-W PM, W-Th AM), Conti- Registration outside of the Orange County Convention Center. nental Breakfasts (W-Th), and the Thursday Banquet. A meet- I/ITSEC Full Service Satellite Registrations will be located ing bag with conference materials (including an Abstract book at the Hyatt Regency and Hilton from Sunday noon through and CD ROM of the current papers) is included. The fees also Tuesday. These stations will be staffed to assist you whether cover administrative expenses incurred. you need to start your registration from scratch or just need I/ITSEC Registration Services for 2015 Hyatt Regency location: Convention Level, near the Grand Ball- to pick up you nametag. We strive to minimize the time spent in line so you can move on room as you pass from the Hyatt to OCCC. to the conference events or the exhibit floor. Our goal is to make Hilton location: Lobby Level at the entrance of the skywalk your I/ITSEC experience a pleasant one even before you enter leading from the hotel to the OCCC. the OCCC. Avoid that line and move on to what you came to Parking I/ITSEC to do! EXHIBITOR PARKING: Traditional Registration Stations. Located in S220 of the South Concourse Registration area, traditional walk-up registration will be available for Full Service Registration, on-site payments, changes/edits to name badges, multiple badge pickups, or just because you prefer dealing one-to-one with a real person. Alternate Registration Stations within the Orange County Convention Center. Specific stations at the Main Registration Station will be open Friday and Saturday to handle, especially, Exhibitor Registration. Conference Attendees are encouraged to wait until Sunday afternoon or use the Self Badging/Self Registration kiosks. Self-badging printing stations will be available for those who pre-registered and received a confirmation number. To $15 per Day – For regular vehicles with re-entry privileges each day. Exhibitor must show badge and receipt for repeat entries. $ 25 per Day – For oversized vehicles with re-entry privileges each day. Exhibitor must show badge and receipt for repeat entries. ATTENDEE PARKING: $15 per Day – For regular vehicles per entry. $25 per Day – For oversized vehicles per entry. AFTER 5PM: $10 per Day – For regular vehicles. Same stipulations as above. $15 per Day – For oversized vehicles. Same stipulations as above. complete your registration at this station, you must be paid in full with no outstanding balance or questions remaining about your registration. VIPs, Speakers (including Paper Presenters), Media, and ACCEPTED PAYMENT METHODS: Cash, Traveler’s Checks, American Express, MasterCard & Visa Dress Code BRANCH CONFERENCE AND GENERAL SESSIONS BANQUET Army ACUs or Duty Uniform Army Blue (Army Evening Mess optional) Marine Corps Service “C” Evening Dress (Dress Blue “B” or Service “A” optional) Navy Service Khaki, Navy Service Uniform Dinner Dress White (Service Dress White optional) Air Force Short or Long Service Blues Service Dress Blue with tie and jacket (Mess Dress optional) Coast Guard Tropical Blue Long Dinner Dress White (Service Dress White optional) Civilian Business attire Black tie (optional) T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 89 LODGING The National Training and Simulation Association has blocked rooms with the Orlando hotels listed below. Make your lodging arrangements either on-line or by phone through Travel Planners, our official Housing Partner, through 24 November 2015. Hotel phone numbers will be posted on the I/ITSEC web at that time for your convenience in making last minute changes or arrangements. (Current room rates may apply after 24 November.) Travel Planners, Inc. is our official housing partner and the only company authorized to represent I/ ITSEC and NTSA. If you are contacted by other companies who present themselves as representing the Conference or Association, please report to bmcdaniel@ndia.org. Note: TravelPlanners is merging with onPeak this year. Your correspondence may reference one or the other company. Our contacts have not changed, and you may feel safe with either identifier. On-Line: Go to http://www.iitsec.org/attendees/Pages/Local Accommodations.aspx, select Lodging, select whether you are a corporate or government attendee and the program attached will lead you through the process from location, to hotel selection, to special needs, to payment and confirmation. By Phone: If you prefer to book via telephone, friendly and knowledgeable agents are ready to take your calls Monday through Friday from 9:00AM – 7:00PM ET at 800-221-3531 or 212-532-1660. More Information about Lodging Arrangements: • Some Room Rates are subject to change, based on the government per diem rate. Those listed with an * are the most likely to change. • Government Rate Room Reservations: Rooms shown in the “Gov’t Rate” column are to be assigned to those with appropriate ID, to be presented at the hotel desk upon check-in. Please do not reserve unless you are eligible to do so. • Be aware that some hotels may charge an additional Resort Fee as well as applicable taxes. • Additional hotels may be added at a later date. • The individual hotels are not authorized to accept reservations directly for this conference. You may state your hotel preference when making your reservations. • Attendees must identify themselves as being with the I/ITSEC to receive the rates shown. • The Conference is being held at the Orange County Convention Center, located between the Hyatt Regency and the Hilton Hotels. The majority of the I/ITSEC 2015 activities will be located in the South Concourse. • Shuttle buses/vans will be available throughout the conference. • To help defray conference management costs, an assessment is included in the room rates shown with these hotels. We encourage you to make your lodging arrangements within the designated housing package established. Hyatt Regency u Homewood Suites (Conference Headquarters) 8745 International Drive 9801 International Drive (407) 248-2232 (407) 352-4000 Industry: $138 • Government: $127* Industry: $229 • Government: $127* iHyatt Place Convention Center q Castle Hotel, Autograph Collection 8471 International Drive 8629 International Drive (407) 370-4720 (407) 245-1511 One Rate: $129 One Rate: $127* o Rosen Centre Hotel w Days Inn Convention Center 9840 International Drive 9990 International Drive (407) 996-9840 (407) 352-8700 Industry: $192 • Government: $127* One Rate: $73 aRosen Inn at the Pointe Orlando eDoubletree by Hilton at Sea World 9000 International Drive 10100 International Drive (407) 996-8505 (407) 352-1100 One Rate: $83 Industry: $131 • Government: $127* sRosen Plaza Hotel r Embassy Suites I-Drive 9700 International Drive 8978 International Drive (407) 996-9700 (407) 352-1400 Industry: $184 • Government: $127 Industry: $184 • Government: $127* dRosen Shingle Creek tHampton Inn Convention Center 9399 Universal Boulevard 8900 Universal Boulevard (407) 996-9939 (407) 354-4447 Industry: $199 • Government: $127* Industry: $128 • Government: $127* fWestin Orlando Universal Boulevard yHilton Orlando 9501 Universal Boulevard 6001 Destination Parkway (407) 233-2200 (407) 313-4300 Industry: $135 • Government: $127* Industry: $229 • Government: $127* 90 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E To get from your hotel to the South Concourse of the OCCC, you have several choices of transportation. • I/ITSEC will provide Shuttle Bus service to all properties listed. (Schedules will be available at the hotels and at the entrance to the conference registration area.) GETTING AROUND • Very reasonable Public Transportation is available on the I-Ride trolley bus along International Drive. Check http://www.iridetrolley.com or your hotel for schedules. • Your own or a rented vehicle. See page 85 for detailed parking information. • Most of the hotels are within walking distance (wear comfortable shoes). The National Training and Simulation Association has arranged for the Hertz Company to be the official car rental agency for I/ITSEC with the special rates below. You can also make your reservations on-line through the I/ITSEC website (Lodging/Travel). Vehicles may be returned to any Hertz location in Florida at no additional charge. CAR CLASS DAILY WEEKEND WEEKLY TO RECEIVE SPECIAL MEETING RATES A Economy $39 $19 $169 Call Hertz at 1-800-654-2240 or 405-749-4434 B Compact $42 $21 $174 or your nearest Hertz reservation center, your C Midsize $45 $23 $184 corporate travel department, or your travel agent D Standard 2/4-Door $49 $25 $194 and give the agent CV#04860008. F Full Size 4-Door $55 $33 $205 Rates are guaranteed from November 23 - G Premium $69 $69 $345 December 10, 2015 subject to car availability. I Luxury $89 $89 $399 Government surcharges, taxes, tax reimbursment, Q4 Midsize SUV $62 $62 $299 title and license fee reimbursement and optional L Standard SUV $74 $74 $339 items such as refueling or additional driver fees, R Minivan 2WD $79 $79 $399 are extra. Advance reservations are (strongly) U Convertible $72 $72 $359 recommended. Minimum rental age is 20 (age T Large SUV $109 $109 $549 differential for age 20-24 applies). Standard rental T6 PRM XCAP SUV $119 $119 $599 conditions and qualifications qualify. Make all the difference in your trip to Orlando by filling your down time with magical moments. Whether it’s spending Client Events & Discounts to Dining, Nightlife, Attractions, Golf, etc.! a truly unforgettable evening Orlando Convention Aid has partnered with an old friend or sharing with I/ITSEC to help you arrange for the perfect restaurant for your client a dazzling nighttime sky with or staff dinner/event. We have a relationship with 60 local venues to a new contact, magical expe- provide this service on a complimentary basis, and we will provide you riences reign supreme in the with availability, pricing, and options, normally at a discount, within Walt Disney World® Theme 24 hours! Please also visit our website by clicking on the golden tickParks. To get additional information and order et graphic at http://www.iitsec.org/attendees/planningyourstay/Pages/ OrlandoConnections.aspx to make dinner reservations, buy discounted tickets go online at: attraction tickets, book tee times, and so much more! This web site will help you plan your time in Orlando and SAVE MONEY! Be sure to check http://www.iitsec.org/attendees/planningyourstay/ out the coupons available and get your coupon book at registration — Pages/OrlandoConnections.aspx jam packed with thousands of dollars of savings! or call 407-566-5600. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 91 P U B L I C AT I O N S & M E D I A Advertising Opportunities: Official Publications of I/ITSEC Now more than ever, with the increased challenges facing the defense and security marketplace, you need to keep your organization’s message in front of its target audience. Reach the leading decision-makers at the world’s largest simulation, training and modeling event of the year by advertising your products and services in the Official Publications of I/ITSEC. Advertising in these publications is an excellent way to stand out in the crowd and invite the attendees to visit your exhibit, product demonstration and/or website. Then after the event has ended, these publications are used by many as desk-references, so your advertisement will reach the decision-makers long after the conference is over. I/ITSEC Proceedings (Three ways to purchase) ONLINE REPOSITORY (PAPERS FROM 1966 – 2015) The I/ITSEC knowledge Repository provides a valuable link to the I/ITSEC training, simulation and education community. Access the online papers repository at http://www.iitsecdocs. com. YEARLY PROCEEDINGS (PAPERS FROM 1995 – 2015) Individual CDs for the years shown above are available for $30.00 each. Each CD includes all accepted papers from that year. Orders can be placed by calling (703) 247-9471. (2002, 2004, 2005, 2007 sold out) I/ITSEC COMPENDIUM (PAPERS FROM 1966 – 2000) Great resource for students, librarians, researchers! The full record of papers published from1966 through 2000 is available for order (or at I/ITSEC) as a two-CD set for $300.00. You may place an order through the NTSA office (703) 247-9471, or on the I/ITSEC registration form. Papers from the pre-electronic era have been reviewed, scanned and provided with keywords, making ALL papers searchable electronically. Orders can be placed by calling (703) 247-9471. Limited supply. Stay in Touch The National Training and Simulation Association’s Annual Simulation & Training Trends and Technology Free Wireless hot spots. E-mail/Internet Kiosks. Complimentary internet, WiFi and email access in the Review – I/ITSEC Exhibitor Directory This publication will be available to all the attendees, exhibitors, and exhibit visitors at I/ITSEC. It will be placed in the attendees’ conference bags and available at registration, and other locations at the convention center. As an added bonus, your ad will also appear in the December Issue of National Defense Magazine — exposure beyond the walls of the convention center. National Defense is sent to over 81,000 BPA audited readers, including the members of NTSA. (Directory section will not appear in National Defense Magazine). I/ITSEC is the premier annual event of its kind, attendance by the mainstream and specialist trade press is heavy, resulting in coverage that reaches your key marketing targets. The I/ITSEC Show Daily Our media staff stands ready to assist you in achieving Advertise in this year’s Daily and be noticed by your customers and potential partners who are attending I/ITSEC. The I/ ITSEC Show Daily informs the simulation & training community on breaking events & happenings on-site at I/ITSEC. It is printed overnight and distributed daily at the conference center, choice hotels, and uploaded to the I/ITSEC website. The daily has evolved into a vital part of I/ITSEC; a “must read” while attending the conference. maximum exposure during your time at I/ITSEC. Corporate Use both to give your company Unequalled Exposure Special packages have been created so your organization can take advantage of both opportunities! Web Banners 92 lobby (look for signage). Internet kiosks are also available at no charge in the Connections Lounge and Grill located inside South Exhibit Hall 100 Aisle. If you need access outside of the complimentary stations, all of OCCC is now WiFi enabled for a modest user fee. representatives are invited to bring their marketing materials to the Media Room for distribution as early as possible after the opening of registration. The Media Room area will also include a separate facility for briefings/ presentations with a capacity of approximately 30 persons. We strongly recommend early bookings for this room, which will be in demand. Additional exhibitor presentations will be made available inside the exhibit hall at the Innovation Showcase, Booth 1080. Prior to the conference, contact John Williams at (703) A limited number of banner ad spaces are available on the I/ITSEC website. 362-7005 or jwilliams@ndia.org; check out more details on the For more information on advertising in these publications, contact Dino Pignotti at (703) 247-2541 or dpignotti@ndia.org. dia Room is S210E, phone (407) 685-6107. I/ITSEC News page of http://www.iitsec.org. The I/ITSEC Me- 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E National Training and Simulation Association The NTSA, an affiliate of NDIA, represents and promotes the business interests of companies in the simulation, training, NTSA’s 200 corporate and 500 individual members enjoy reduced fees on all NTSA events and services, as well as a monthly e-newsletter (Training Industry News) and National Defense magazine. Sustaining and Regular Corporate members receive early space selection and discounts on exhibit space at I/ITSEC. Individual memberships are also available. For membership information, call (703) 247-9471 or NOVEMBER 28 – DECEMBER 2 2016 Orange County Convention Center • West Concourse Orlando, FL visit the NTSA website http://www.trainingsystems.org. Exhibit Information National Defense Industrial Association Debbie Langelier, CEM Based in Arlington, Virginia, the National Defense Industrial Director of Exhibits, NTSA Association (NDIA) is a non-profit, educational association Phone: (703) 247-9480 representing industry, government, and all the military ser- FAX: (703) 243-1659 vices. About 1,600 companies and 87,000 individuals rely on NDIA for networking, knowledge, and business development opportunities. As the nation’s leading E-mail: dlangelier@ndia.org defense industry association promoting national security, NDIA advocates cut- Visit http://exhibits.iitsec.org ting-edge technology and superior weapons, equipment, training, and support for to view the current floor plan, the warfighter and first responder. Through events, working divisions, local chap- exhibitor list, and ters, and four affiliate organizations, NDIA connects the government and defense industry to create a vigorous and ethical forum of information exchange leading to S P O N S O R I N G A S S O C I AT I O N mission planning/rehearsal, and support services industry. SAVE THE DATE FOR I/ITSEC 2016! sponsorship opportunities. greater support for national security. For NDIA membership information visit www.ndia.org or contact Mike Kibler at mkibler@ndia.org. Women In Defense, A NATIONAL SECURITY ORGANIZATION EARNING THE CMSP DESIGNATION WILL: • Demonstrate expertise in the field of M&S to your employer and the larger TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS AND TO APPLY, PLEASE VISIT M&S community • Provide opportunities for professional advancement Requirements include 3-8 years WWW.SIMPROFESSIONAL. of work experience (depending on ORG level of highest collegiate degree), 3 professional letters of reference, OR CONTACT PATRICK ROWE AT and successful completion of an PROWE@NDIA.ORG. online examination. CMSP Applicants now have a choice between CMSP-Technical and CMSP-Management exams. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T Celebrating its 30th year, Women In Defense (WID), A National Security Organization, cultivates and supports the advancement and recognition of women working in all sectors of national security. Established in 1985, Women In Defense became an affiliate of the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) in 2004. WID Membership is open to women and men whose primary professional activities relate to the United States’ national security. WID members are from defense companies and related small, medium and large business, all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, government agencies, academia, associations and professional services. Women In Defense provides women a dynamic community for developing leadership skills as well as mentoring, networking, and educational programs with CEU’s and CLP’s for programs available in 2016. WID National provides many educational and professional development programs in addition to the many programs of WID’s 20 Chapters across the country. 93 SAFETY & SECURITY FOR LIFE THREATENING EMERGENCIES DIAL 911 SECURITY HOTLINE DURING I/ITSEC: (407) 685-6111 Security Training Before The Conference Technology collection directives contain mandates requiring exhibitors and presenters to receive a Counterintelligence (CI) briefing from their CI support staff prior to I/ITSEC. Contractors with classified contracts may contact their Defense Security Service Special Agents. To avoid security breaches, I/ITSEC presenters and exhibitors should ensure that the required briefing has been received. A list of CI support agencies follows. Please contact your security officer/manager and ensure that an appropriate briefing for yourself and your colleagues is arranged. Providers of the briefings are: 902 Military Intelligence Army Navy, USMC, Coast Guard Naval Criminal Investigative Service Air Force Office of Special Investigation Air Force Defense Security Service Contractors Personal Security The most important thing to protect, of course, is yourself. Pay attention to your surroundings. Report suspicious behavior or security breaches to a security person or NTSA staff. Familiarize yourself with emergency procedures and exits at your hotel and the Convention Center. Conference Security Office will be located in the South Lobby Registration Area and inside the Exhibit Hall. Emergency Medical Services EMT and/or paramedics will be on-site during I/ITSEC (including hall build-up and tear-down). During I/ITSEC 2015, they will be located on the same level as Registration, near the escalators between S220 and S230. See the layout on page 13 for the exact location. Dial 911 for life threatening emergencies. For non emergencies within the center, dial 5-9809 or on your cell dial (407) 685-9809. Or alert any security or I/ITSEC staff member with a radio. Bags and Briefcases Bags and Briefcases may be carried in by those wearing Conference Attendee or Exhibitor badges. Exhibit Visitors (those who are only visiting the exhibits) WILL NOT be allowed to carry in bags or briefcases. A check room will be available in the main registration area. A small purse or fanny pack is allowed, but is subject to search. Additional security restrictions may be posted on http://www.iitsec.org and on signage at the conference. Conference Management reserves the right to adjust security levels as deemed necessary during the conference. Presentations Recording devices will not be permitted in the presentation rooms, unless authorized by the conference management. Presenters and Exhibitors should review their company’s policy documents and those of the government agencies with whom you contract regarding open distribution, limited distribution, restricted distribution and sharing limitations. Cameras Exhibitors have the right to limit photographs and videos of their displays. Please respect this right by asking before photographing or videotaping. Participants found taking photos or videos without the consent of the subject presentors or exhibitors will be dealt with according to security procedures, to possibly include confiscation of materials and removal from the premises. Inquiries (before the conference) Registration (702) 798-8340 • Exhibit/Sponsorship (703) 247-9480 • All other inquiries (703) 247-2569 94 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E Earle L. Denton Memorial Golf Tournament Organized by Central Florida Chapter NDIA • Sunday, 29 November OR Monday, 30 November GOLF TOURNAMENT Rosen Shingle Creek Golf Club 9939 Universal Blvd, Orlando, FL 32819 • 407-996-9933 • www.shinglecreekgolf.com Deadlines On-Line Registration Golf 23 November • Register and/or select sponsorship at www.iitsec.org. Sponsorship 19 November • Register one to four players at a time. • Select day of play (Sunday or Monday). Tournament Times Sunday 1100 Registration 1230 Start Fees Monday 0630 Registration 0730 Start $90 per player (green fees, range balls, cart, lunch) Point of Contact Debbie Berry Coordinate club rentals directly with the Rosen Shingle 407-748-3807 Creek Golf Club pro shop. debbie.berry@lmco.com Two Day Sponsorships Format Details available at www.iitsec.org Captain’s Choice/Scramble Tee Box $500 Putting Green $500 Pairings & Requests Driving Range $500 Final assignments and pairings will be made by the tourna- GPS$750 ment coordinator. Priority is based upon receipt of payment. Beverage Cart $2,500 Hole-in-One$2,500 NOTE: Requested team pairings cannot be guaranteed if not Boxed Lunch $3,000 registered together. Requests noted under comments when registering will be considered but cannot be guaranteed. Sponsors If requesting pairing with player(s) registering separately, Send your logos via email to debbie.berry@lmco.com no specify all names in the comment area when registering. later than 19 November. Do not bring your own sign Cancellations *Scholarships and additional qualified initiatives supported Must be received via email to debbie.berry@lmco.com by through tournament proceeds; for a full list of initiatives close of business 20 November to receive 50% refund. (STEM, Wounded Warriors, etc.) supported, please visit: No refunds thereafter. http://www.ndia-cfl.org. T H E W O R L D ’ S L A R G E S T M O D E L I N G & S I M U L AT I O N E V E N T 95 5K RUN ANNUAL I/ITSEC 5K RUN/WALK/ROLL 2015 W ED N ES DAY, D E C EM B ER 2 , 2 0 1 5 Orange County Convention Center 5:30AM Packet Pickup • 6:45AM Start Time WEBSITE: http://www.iitsec.org/attendees/planningyourstay www.facebook.com/iitsec5k All registered runners will receive custom race tech shirt, custom race metal, swag bag, race bib and official timing by Milestone Race Authority, pre- and post-race refreshments. Tax deductible registration. IRD EARISLYTRB ATION REG $ 25 until October 31 Registration $35 November 1 - November 29 Late Registration $45 November 30 & December 1 CHARITIES THE 5K WILL SUPPORT TITLE SPONSOR Camaraderie Foundation IITSEC STEM Initiative Email Sean Osmond for Race Information at iitsec5k@gmail.com or Debbie Langelier for Sponsorship information at dlangelier@ndia.org 96 2 0 1 5 I N T E R S E R V I C E / I N D U S T RY T R A I N I N G, S I M U L AT I O N & E D U C AT I O N C O N F E R E N C E I/ITSEC 2016 Save the Date! Pushing the Training Envelope Live • Virtual • Constructive NATIONAL TRAINING AND SIMULATION ASSOCIATION R E G I S T R A T I O N T HI NE FWOO R R LM D ’AS T LI AORNG E S T I/ITSEC MODELING & SIMULATION EVENT INTERSERVICE/INDUSTRY TRAINING, SIMULATION & EDUCATION CONFERENCE PUSHING THE TRAINING ENVELOPE LIVE • VIRTUAL • CONSTRUCTIVE e! Sa v e th e Da t No v emb e r 28016 Dec emb e r 2, 2 w w w.ii ts ec.o r g NOVEMBER 28-DECEMBER 2 u WWW.IITSEC.ORG u ORLANDO, FLORIDA NATIONAL TRAINING AND SIMULATION ASSOCIATION THE WORLD’S LARGEST MODELING & SIMULATION EVENT CALL FOR PAPERS AND TUTORIALS Pushing the Training Envelope I/ITSEC 2016 Live • Virtual • Constructive ABSTRACT DEADLINE: 22 FEBRUARY 2016 ON-LINE ABSTRACT SUBMITTAL SUBCOMMITTEES/CATEGORIES • Education • Emerging Concepts & Innovative Technologies • Human Performance, Analysis and Engineering • Policy, Standards, Management & Acquisition • Simulation • Training TUTORIALS Information on core M&S, training, and education topics suitable for management and technical personnel. The submission process for the I/ITSEC Papers and Tutorials coincide. Submittal details will vary slightly, but the milestones will match. Follow the Papers/Tutorials Completion Process for 2016 Abstract Submittal which will be posted in December. http://www.iitsec.org/authors I/ITSEC 2016 Program Chair Elizabeth Biddle, Ph.D., CMSP The Boeing Company Phone: 407-249-3562 Email: elizabeth.m.biddle@boeing.com I/ITSEC 2016 Tutorial Board Chair David Milewski Booz | Allen | Hamilton Phone: 757-784-2865 Email: milewski_david@bah.com NOVEMBER 28-DECEMBER 2 u WWW.IITSEC.ORG u ORLANDO, FLORIDA Abstracts 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts FELLOWS 2015 FELLOWS PAPER: SIMNET AND BEYOND: A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRIBUTED SIMULATION ................................................................................................................. 8 BEST PAPERS STRESS EXPOSURE TRAINING FOR THE DISMOUNTED SQUAD: THE HUMAN DIMENSION ................................................................................................................................................ 9 DIFFERENTIATING MEASURES OF LEARNING (MOL) FROM MEASURES OF PERFORMANCE (MOP) DURING AIRCRAFT CARRIER LANDING PRACTICE ........................ 9 YOU CANNOT HIT WHAT YOU DO NOT SHOOT.............................................................................10 SAFE TESTING OF AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE .................................................11 CYBER OPERATIONAL ARCHITECTURE TRAINING SYSTEM – CYBER FOR ALL ..............11 MEASURING VIRTUAL SIMULATION’S VALUE IN TRAINING EXERCISES - USMC USE CASE ............................................................................................................................................................12 EDUCATION STUDENT RETENTION IN STEM CAREER PATHS: PRIMARY INFLUENCES ON THE DECISION TO STAY OR LEAVE ...........................................................................................................13 OVERCOMING THE CHALLENGE OF EVALUATING SKILLS TRANSFER FROM TRAINING TO JOB ........................................................................................................................................................13 MEASURING A MOVING TARGET: VALIDATING DEPLOYED TRAINING COURSES ..........14 ENHANCING GOOD STRANGER SKILLS: A METHOD AND STUDY ..........................................15 CURRICULUM GPS: AN ADAPTIVE CURRICULUM GENERATION AND PLANNING SYSTEM ......................................................................................................................................................15 MARS GAME: CREATING AND EVALUATING AN ENGAGING EDUCATIONAL GAME .......16 THE SECRET FOR STEM SUCCESS: EMPLOYING TECHNOLOGY FOR MATH PROFICIENCY ...........................................................................................................................................17 INQUIRY AND DESIGN APPROACH TO STEM EDUCATION USING PROJECT-BASED LEARNING .................................................................................................................................................17 ANTECEDENTS OF ADAPTIVE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS ................18 ADAPTABLE RESILIENCE TRAINING FOR TRANSITIONING VETERANS USING EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES ..................................................................................................................19 THE CHANGING FACE OF MILITARY LEARNING .........................................................................19 GAME-BASED TRAINING FOR HUMAN-INTELLIGENCE SKILLS .............................................20 A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF PEDAGOGIC DESIGN TO SUPPORT CRITICAL THINKING IN COMMANDERS ..............................................................................................................21 DESIGNING INSTRUCTOR SUPPORT TOOLS FOR VIRTUAL SHIPHANDLING TRAINING...................................................................................................................................................22 HEY, REMEMBER TO ADD MOTIVATIONAL DESIGN TO YOUR E-LEARNING .....................22 ACHIEVING EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE: WHAT DO EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTORS DO? .................................................................................................................................23 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 1 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts INNOVATIVELY APPLYING SKILL ACQUISITION THEORY TO THE ARMY LEARNING MODEL ........................................................................................................................................................24 TRANSMEDIA (SOCIAL) LEARNING IN THE WILD: EXPLORING A CONTINUUM OF SUPPORT FOR TRANSITIONING SERVICE MEMBERS .................................................................24 INNOVATIVE MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES FOR ASSESSING AND ENHANCING SOLDIER PERFORMANCE........................................................................................................................................25 A REFERENCE MODEL FOR DESIGNING MOBILE LEARNING AND PERFORMANCE SUPPORT ....................................................................................................................................................26 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF MOBILE ADAPTIVE TRAINING TECHNOLOGIES ......................................................................................................................................26 EMERGING CONCEPTS & INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES (ECIT) AUTOMATED SIMULATION CREATION FROM MILITARY OPERATIONS DOCUMENTS .............................................................................................................................................27 SCHEDULING TRAINING TO MANAGE ACQUISITION & DECAY..............................................28 M&S AS A SERVICE: PARADIGM FOR FUTURE SIMULATION ENVIRONMENTS .................28 MILITARY VEHICLE TRAINING WITH AUGMENTED REALITY ...............................................29 MODELLING A HELICOPTER TRAINING CONTINUUM TO SUPPORT SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION ................................................................................................................................30 TOWARD COGNITIVE TWO-WAY INTERACTIONS IN AN IMMERSIVE VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENT .....................................................................................................................31 MODELING AND INTEGRATING COGNITIVE AGENTS WITHIN THE EMERGING CYBER DOMAIN .......................................................................................................................................31 TABLET COMPUTER CALL FOR FIRE SIMULATION: PROOF OF CONCEPT STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................................................................................................32 TURN-BASED GAMING FOR CONVOY COMMANDER TRAINING .............................................33 AN IMMERSIVE LIVE / VIRTUAL BRIDGE APPROACH WITH ULTRA WIDEBAND TRACKING TECHNOLOGY: PHASE II ...............................................................................................33 VIRTUALIZING HUMANS FOR GAME READY AVATARS ............................................................34 RELIABLY ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A PLAN USING MODELS OF VARYING FIDELITY AND UNDER TIME CONSTRAINTS ..............................................................35 REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE SAFS: BEYOND TACTICAL REALISM ....................................35 REQUIRED FIDELITY OF SIMULATED WOUNDS AT THE POINT OF INJURY .......................36 VIRTUAL INTERVIEW TRAINING INCREASES JOB OFFERS FOR VETERANS AND OTHERS ......................................................................................................................................................37 STEPPING STONES – AN AUGMENTED REALITY REHABILITATION GAME ........................37 THE VA VIRTUAL MEDICAL CENTER: IMPLEMENTING A VISION FOR A VIRTUAL HEALTHCARE CAMPUS FOR OUR VETERANS ...............................................................................38 VISUALIZING FMRI DATA USING VOLUME RENDERING IN VIRTUAL REALITY ...............39 PROFESSIONAL SOLDIER ASSESSMENT OF A RIFLE-MOUNTED TARGET HAND-OFF SYSTEM ......................................................................................................................................................39 EMPIRICAL SUPPORT FOR BRAIN-BASED ASSESSMENT IN SIMULATION-BASED TRAINING...................................................................................................................................................40 2 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts PUTTING LIVE FIRING RANGE DATA TO WORK USING THE XAPI .........................................41 ADAPTING GUNNERY TRAINING USING THE EXPERIENCE API..............................................41 OPENING LEGACY DATA SILOS: USING EXPERIENCE DATA FOR EDUCATIONAL IMPACT .......................................................................................................................................................42 RAPID 3D GEOSPATIALLY ORIENTED STRUCTURE EXTRACTION FROM MINIMAL IMAGE .........................................................................................................................................................43 EXTENDING INTELLIGENT TUTORING BEYOND THE DESKTOP TO THE PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN .....................................................................................................................43 DELIVERING 3D VIRTUAL MAINTENANCE TRAINING CONTENT: EXAMINING THE DEPLOYMENT OPTIONS........................................................................................................................44 GAMERS TODAY, SURGEONS TOMORROW? ..................................................................................45 RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN LEARNER AND ENVIRONMENT: LEARNER TRAITS IN SERIOUS GAMES ......................................................................................................................................45 LEARNING STORIES: DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR NARRATIVE ELEMENTS IN SERIOUS GAMES ......................................................................................................................................46 PROCEDURAL RECONSTRUCTION OF SIMULATION TERRAIN USING DRONES ................47 ASSESSMENT OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT PLATFORM PERFORMANCE USING MODELING AND SIMULATION ............................................................................................................47 EARLY SYNTHETIC PROTOTYPING: WHEN WE BUILD IT, WILL THEY COME? ................48 IMPLEMENTATION OF AGILE METHODS WITHIN INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS DESIGN: A CASE STUDY ..........................................................................................................................................49 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A VENIPUNCTURE AND PHLEBOTOMY TRAINING SYSTEM .................................................................................................................................49 HUMAN PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING (HPAE) PILOTING A GROUNDBREAKING VIRTUAL CONTINUING COMPETENCY PLATFORM: RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................50 MOBILE APP DESIGN FOR VETERANS WITH PHYSICAL AND COGNITIVE LIMITATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................51 STRUCTURED DEVELOPMENT OF INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE PHYSICIAN KNOWLEDGE RETENTION ...................................................................................................................51 WORK DOMAIN ANALYSIS FOR ECOLOGICAL INTERFACE DESIGN OF TANGIBLE INTERFACES .............................................................................................................................................52 ADAPTIVE TESTING: ADAPT AND OVERCOME THE SHORTFALLS OF TRADITIONAL PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENTS .............................................................................................................53 COGNITIVE LOAD ASSESSMENT FOR INTELLIGENCE ANALYSTS THROUGH FMV (FMV) ANALYTICS ...............................................................................................................................................53 MULTI-MEASURE ASSESSMENT OF INTERNAL DISTRACTIONS ON DRIVER PERFORMANCE........................................................................................................................................54 HOW HUMANS TRUST AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES: A STUDY IN MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT AND PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES ...................................................................55 BUILDING TRUST IN A HUMAN-ROBOT TEAM WITH AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED EXPLANATIONS .......................................................................................................................................55 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 3 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts AUTOMATED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT IN CYBER TRAINING EXERCISES ................56 COMMAND SHIFT: EXPLORING MODERN GAMING TECHNOLOGIES TO CREATE NEXT-GENERATION OCO INTERFACES ...........................................................................................57 EMBEDDING CYBER-PHYSICAL SYSTEMS FOR ASSESSING PERFORMANCE IN TRAINING SIMULATIONS .....................................................................................................................57 HUMAN PERFORMANCE IN CONTENT DESIGN FOR INTERACTIVE AUGMENTED REALITY SYSTEMS .................................................................................................................................58 USING MICRO AND MACRO STUDIES OF TABLETS TO IMPROVE MAINTENANCE ...........59 HELICOPTER PILOT’S MODELING INCLUDING THE STRESS FACTOR .................................60 HUMAN-IN-THE-LOOP FLIGHT SIMULATION STUDY OF VIRTUAL CONSTRUCTIVE REPRESENTATION ON LIVE AVIONICS DISPLAYS .......................................................................60 PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR VALIDATING SURVEY APPARATUSES IN COALITION TRAINING ENVIRONMENTS.........................................................................................61 STEALTH ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEM-SOLVING SKILLS FROM GAMEPLAY .....................62 “FIXING” THE MILITARY DECISION MAKING PROCESS (MDMP) ...........................................62 THE SMALL UNIT DECISION MAKING ASSESSMENT BATTERY: DEVELOPMENT AND PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................63 MARINENET USER ENGAGEMENT EXERCISE ...............................................................................64 SUPPORTING UNIT TRAINING MANAGEMENT THROUGH MOBILE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT TOOLS ..............................................................................................................................64 MARINE CORPS INSTRUCTOR MASTERY MODEL: A FOUNDATION FOR MARINE FACULTY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................................65 REALISM AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ROBOTIC MOVING TARGETS .........................................66 EEG/ECG OSCILLATION OF SOLDIER’S MENTAL STATES ON THE SHOOTING TASKS IN THE TANK SIMULATOR .....................................................................................................66 NOVICE AND EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER SIMULATION EXPERIENCE – GUIDING THE FUTURE ..........................................................................................................................67 POLICY, STANDARDS, MANAGEMENT, AND ACQUISITION (PSMA) THE LIVE-SYNTHETIC TRAINING, TEST AND EVALUATION ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE ......................................................................................................................................68 EARLY ADOPTION OF COMMON OPERATING ENVIRONMENT (COE) STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES ....................................................................................................................................68 THE SEJONG THE GREAT CLASS DDGS: HOW ROK NAVY EMBRACED AND TRAINED THEM ...........................................................................................................................................................69 A SYSTEM-MODEL-CENTRIC COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION LIFECYCLE....................................................................................................................70 IMPROVING EDUCATION, TRAINING AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT THROUGH COMPETENCY PORTABILITY .............................................................................................................71 STEMULATING: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO CULTIVATING OUR FUTURE...............71 MODELING AND SIMULATION PROFESSIONALS – MEETING THE DEMAND ......................72 CALCULATING SIMULATION-BASED TRAINING VALUE: COST AVOIDANCE AND PROFICIENCY ...........................................................................................................................................73 4 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts LARGE SCALE ADOPTION OF TRAINING SIMULATIONS: ARE WE THERE YET? ...............73 AUTOMATED SURVEYS: LOWERING THE RESPONDENT’S BURDEN .....................................74 RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (RMF) TRANSITION IMPACTS IN TRAINING SIMULATION SYSTEMS .........................................................................................................................75 CYBERSECURITY CONTROLS: THEN AND NOW ...........................................................................75 CYBERSECURITY CHALLENGES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR SIMULATOR & TRAINING SYSTEMS ....................................................................................................................................................76 SIMULATION MOBILE AUGMENTED REALITY FOR FORCE-ON-FORCE TRAINING ....................................77 USING AUGMENTED REALITY TO TRAIN COMBAT MEDICS: AN EVALUATION ................77 REAL-TIME CUTTING OF ORGANS WITH SCISSORS ...................................................................78 SIMULATION SCENARIO ENCODING FOR REUSE ........................................................................79 MULTI-FEDERATE SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING: “A GOOD PLAN, VIOLENTLY EXECUTED” ......................................................................................................................79 THE EXPECTED RESULTS METHOD FOR DATA VERIFICATION .............................................80 POLYGONE LVC: THE NEW PARADIGM FOR EW TRAINING ....................................................81 LIVE SYNTHETIC TRAINING AND TEST & EVALUATION INFRASTRUCTURE ARCHITECTURE (LS TTE IA) PROTOTYPE ......................................................................................81 MEASURING REALISM IN SIMULATIONS FOR TRAINING AND TESTING .............................82 NETWORK BANDWIDTH'S EFFECT ON VIRTUAL WORLD SIMULATOR PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION ........................................................................................................................................83 3D IMMERSIVE ENVIRONMENT USING X-PLANE FOR DEPTH PERCEPTION RESEARCH .................................................................................................................................................83 BATTLE DAMAGE COMPUTATION SERVER ...................................................................................84 HIGH FIDELITY WIND MODEL SOFTWARE FOR REAL-TIME SIMULATION PLATFORMS ..............................................................................................................................................85 AUTOMATED RUNTIME TERRAIN DATABASE CORRELATION ASSESSMENT ....................85 AUTOMATED MODELIZATION IN TERRAIN DATABASE PRODUCTION ................................86 MODELING CGF BEHAVIOR WITH MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES: REQUIREMENTS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS .................................................................................87 AUTOMATIC SPEECH RECOGNITION IN TRAINING SYSTEMS: MISCONCEPTIONS, CHALLENGES AND PATHS FORWARD .............................................................................................87 ON THE PERIPHERAL APPLICATION OF HMD DEVICES IN INFANTRY SIMULATION......88 M&S TRAINING TRANSFORMATION: BRIDGING THE NEXT GENERATION JOINT LVC .................................................................................................................................................89 LEVERAGING CLOUD COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY FOR LVC TRAINING ............................89 OSSEUS, AN EXPERIMENT IN NEXT GENERATION LVC M&S ARCHITECTURE .................90 EMBARKING ON A HOME STATION TRAINING REVOLUTION .................................................91 IMPLEMENTATION OF ROLE-BASED COMMAND HIERARCHY MODEL FOR ACTOR COOPERATION .........................................................................................................................................91 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 5 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts INNOVATIVE DIVISION/BRIGADE LEVEL COMMANDING OFFICER TRAINING SOLUTION FOR INFLUENCE OPERATIONS .....................................................................................92 REDUCING OPERATIONAL RISK THROUGH BETTER PERFORMANCE TESTING ..............93 DESIGN OF AN EDUCATIONAL TOOL FOR UNMANNED AIR VEHICLE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................................93 USING SIMULATION TO TEST MANNED-UNMANNED TEAMING .............................................94 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A GENERAL VIRTUAL MAINTENANCE TRAINING PLATFORM ................................................................................................................................................95 VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT COMPUTER-BASED TRAINING FOR BRIDGE AND TUNNEL INSPECTIONS ............................................................................................................................................95 DEVELOPING AUTHORING TOOLS FOR SKILL MODELS THAT ENABLE ADAPTIVE GAME-BASED MAINTENANCE TRAINING .......................................................................................96 TOWARD ACQUIRING A HUMAN BEHAVIOR MODEL OF COMPETITION VS. COOPERATION .........................................................................................................................................97 EMBEDDED SIMULATION TO PREVENT TACTICAL SURPRISE AND IMPROVE SOLDIER PERFORMANCE .....................................................................................................................97 DISTRIBUTED SOLDIER REPRESENTATION: IMPROVING M&S REPRESENTATION OF THE SOLDIER............................................................................................................................................98 A MBSE APPROACH IN MODELING SYSTEMS USING HYBRID SIMULATION TECHNIQUES ............................................................................................................................................99 SIMULATOR ARCHITECTURE UPGRADE UTILIZING VIRTUAL MACHINES (VMS) ...........99 IMPROVED PROCESS FOR BRIDGING THE TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION VALLEY OF DEATH .......................................................................................................................................................100 TRAINING MEASURING TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS OF LIGHTWEIGHT GAME-BASED CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION ..........................................................................................................101 VALIDATING SCENARIO-BASED TRAINING SEQUENCING: THE SCENARIO COMPLEXITY TOOL .............................................................................................................................101 ADAPTIVE INSTRUCTOR OPERATING STATIONS: DESIGN TO DECREASE INSTRUCTOR WORKLOAD AND INCREASE EFFECTIVENESS ............................................................................102 METRICS ASSESSMENT TOWARD A TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION OF AUGMENTED VIRTUALITY FOR CALL FOR FIRE TRAINING: INSIGHTS FROM A NOVICE POPULATION ..........................................................................................................................................103 EMPIRICALLY DERIVED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRAINING NOVICES USING VIRTUAL WORLDS ................................................................................................................................103 USING AUGMENTED REALITY TO TUTOR MILITARY TASKS IN THE WILD ......................104 DEVELOPING GAME-BASED LEADERSHIP TRAINING FOR ROBOTIC SURGEONS ..........105 THE USE OF HYPER-REALISTIC SURGICAL SIMULATION ......................................................105 ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF VIRTUAL EMERGENCY TRAINING ON MINE RESCUE TEAM EFFICACY ...................................................................................................................................106 ALTERNATIVE FRONT END ANALYSIS FOR AUTOMATED COMPLEX SYSTEMS .............107 EVALUATING DISTRIBUTED TEAMS WITH THE TEAM MULTIPLE ERRANDS TEST ......107 6 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts EXERCISE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR LIVE, VIRTUAL, AND CONSTRUCTIVE (LVC) TRAINING....................................................................................................108 INTEGRATING WARSHIP BRIDGE, COMBAT, AND DECK TEAMS IN LVC ENVIRONMENT ......................................................................................................................................109 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT OF TEST AND LIVE TRAINING SYSTEMS FOR REAL-TIME CASUALTY ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................109 IMPROVING MILITARY CREW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT USING A COMMERCIAL STRATEGY GAME ..................................................................................................................................110 SIMULATION AND TRAINING CHALLENGES FOR INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE ANALYSTS ................................................................................................111 EFFECTIVENESS OF PROCESS LEVEL FEEDBACK AT TRAINING TACTICAL DECISION MAKING....................................................................................................................................................111 TABLE OF AUTHORS ............................................................................................................................113 PLEASE NOTE: TUTORIALS ARE INCLUDED ON THE CD Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 7 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts 2015 FELLOWS PAPER: SIMNET AND BEYOND: A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRIBUTED SIMULATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. IF1501 Duncan C. Miller, Sc.D. Why Is SIMNET Important? SIMNET stands for SIMulator NETworking. Initiated in 1983, it was the first “shared virtual reality” distributed simulation system, which continues to have significant influences. It was sponsored by DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Department of Defense’s principal high-risk, high-payoff research and development organization, established in 1958. In 1991, a study of various DARPA initiatives by the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies listed SIMNET as one of six programs that have had the most profound effects on the DoD. To put this in perspective, the other five were the ARPANET (the predecessor of the Internet); the individual computer workstation; phased array radar; the stealth technology used to make aircraft such as the F-117 fighter and the B-2 bomber “invisible” on radar; and ATACMS, the low cost, long-range tactical artillery rocket system used successfully in Desert Storm to destroy enemy surface-to-air missile sites and other targets (Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, 1991). That’s quite a distinguished list in which to be included! WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A BP-1 - Education, Training, & Human Performance Analysis & Engineering 1030 Stress Exposure Training for the Dismounted Squad: The Human Dimension (15150) (Education) 1100 Differentiating Measures of Learning (MOL) from Measures of Performance (MOP) During Aircraft Carrier Landing Practice (15210) (Training) 1130 You Cannot Hit What You Do Not Shoot (15209) (Human Performance Analysis and Engineering) Notes 8 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts STRESS EXPOSURE TRAINING FOR THE DISMOUNTED SQUAD: THE HUMAN DIMENSION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15150 Dr. Jay Brimstin Squad Overmatch Study Team U.S. Army, Maneuver Center of Excellence PEO STRI, MCoE, ARL, STTC, MITRE, CPG Ft Benning, GA Orlando, FL and Ft. Benning, GA Today’s soldiers face a complex, unpredictable, and fluid operational environment encountering more stressors and trauma than ever before. Mental disorders account for more hospitalizations of U.S. service members than any other diagnostic category. The Army is aggressively pursuing programs to address these challenges, including revising the Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness Program and launching the Ready and Resilient Campaign to improve the performance, resilience, and readiness of soldiers. While most of the emphasis has been on post-event treatment, preventative resilience training that focuses on the human dimension is a key priority for the Army. The Army Study Program Office provided funding for the Squad Overmatch Study in 2013 and 2014 as its top priority program. This study is focused on investigating how to improve existing training methodologies and technologies to better develop cognitive skills and mental resilience at the squad level with more combat realistic exercises and experiences. The vision for the Squad Overmatch Study is to optimize performance by enhancing existing training—from basic individual skills to unit training prior to, during, and post-deployment—through early and continuous Stress Exposure Training (SET) to reduce post-traumatic stress and to better prepare soldiers for the stressful situations that are a natural part of combat operations. In June of 2014 the study team conducted a demonstration of graduated SET, as well as cognitive and situational awareness skills training. Of the soldiers who participated, 90% agreed that the use of virtual technologies is effective for training situational awareness and resilience and 100% agreed that training that provides realistic scenarios are helpful in preparing for stressful combat situations. This paper will describe the Squad Overmatch Study objectives, the squad-based SET gaming, virtual and live scenario exercises and technologies used, and present results of the 2014 demonstration at Fort Benning, Georgia. DIFFERENTIATING MEASURES OF LEARNING (MOL) FROM MEASURES OF PERFORMANCE (MOP) DURING AIRCRAFT CARRIER LANDING PRACTICE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15210 Jeffrey M. Beaubien & E. Webb Stacy Sterling L. Wiggins Aptima, Inc. Aptima, Inc. Woburn, MA Fairborn, OH Amy E. Bolton LCDR Jefferson D. Grubb Melissa M. Walwanis, Office of Naval Research, Naval Aviation System Heather Priest Code 34 Program Office Naval Air Warfare Center Arlington, VA (PMA-205) Training Systems Division Patuxent River, MD Orlando, FL Michael J. Keeney Aptima, Inc. Washington, DC Christian S. Riddle Naval Air Systems Command, Manned Flight Simulator Patuxent River, MD Measures of performance collected during initial skill acquisition can be misleading indicators of long-term retention or transfer (Soderstrom & Bjork, 2013). For example, previous research demonstrates that learning can occur in the absence of visible performance gains, and temporary performance gains can occur in the absence of long-term retention or transfer (Singer & Edmondson, 2006; Soderstrom & Bjork, 2013). Therefore, it is critical that authors clearly differentiate between Measures of Learning (MOLs) and Measures of Performance (MOPs) in their research. While this distinction was frequently made in the psychological literature until the 1950’s, it has been somewhat forgotten since then (Schmidt & Bjork, 1992). As part of a larger study on the effects of simulator cue fidelity on aircraft carrier landing skills, we collected both MOLs and MOPs. The sample included fifteen Navy F/A-18 pilots (8 novices, 7 experts), each of whom flew 24 landing passes in a high-fidelity simulator over two consecutive days. MOPs were calculated for each pass, and were operationalized as deviations (measured in degrees) from the ideal angle of attack, glide slope, and center line. The data were then aggregated across all 24 passes. In contrast, MOLs were operationalized as changes in performance over time. The two sets of analyses – learning vs. performance – provide very different interpretations of the data. In this paper, we describe the conceptual differences between MOLs and MOPs; show how the choice of analysis can have profound implications for interpreting the results; and provide the reader with actionable guidelines that they can use in their own work to better differentiate learning from performance. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 9 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts YOU CANNOT HIT WHAT YOU DO NOT SHOOT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15209 Martin L. Bink & Elizabeth Uhl U.S. Army Research Institute Fort Benning, GA David James Northrop-Grumman Corp. Columbus, GA A training system can only be effective if it is appropriately utilized, regardless of whether the training system is a sophisticated full-motion simulator or steel targets on a small-arms range. However, without understanding how trainees use a training system and without clear performance feedback, it is not likely that desired training outcomes will be met. A recent example of training-system underutilization impacting training performance comes from the U.S. Army Sniper School (USASS). In the USASS, sniper teams spend a considerable amount of time at the beginning of the course conducting “data confirmation.” Data confirmation is accomplished by engaging static targets at varying distances on an unknown distance range. So, in the case of data confirmation, the training system is very simple: a small arms range with static targets at varying distances. It was observed over several iterations of USASS that shooters rarely engaged targets at distances beyond 600 m during data confirmation and that, when engaged, the hit percentage of targets over 600 m was very low. The consequence of failing to shoot at far targets (i.e., over 600 m) during data confirmation was low hit percentages on far targets in the record fire event that was a graduation requirement. An intervention was introduced to increase engagements with far targets that required USASS instructors to record and analyze individual shot data. By requiring instructors to document data, the instructor was able to determine if the shooter was spending too much time at closer distances (i.e., not fully utilizing the training system) and to intervene if necessary. The result was increased record-fire performance on far targets. Even though the intervention and results may seem intuitive, the need for such an intervention highlights the importance of trainer engagement to ensure proper training-system utilization and the importance of providing performance feedback during training. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A BP-2 Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies; Simulation; & Policy Standards Management and Acquisition 1400 Safe Testing of Autonomous Systems Performance (15348) (Emerging Concepts and Innovative Technologies) 1430 Cyber Operational Architecture Training System – Cyber for All (15108) (Simulation) 1500 Measuring Virtual Simulation’s Value in Training Exercises – USMC Use Case (15114) (Policy Standards Management and Acquisition) Notes 10 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts SAFE TESTING OF AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15348 David Scheidt, Robert Lutz, William D’Amico, Dean Kleissas, Robert Chalmers, Robert Bamberger, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD The role of unmanned platforms is rapidly expanding across a wide range of defense and homeland security missions. Currently operational unmanned vehicles are “tele-operated”, using a command and control link to a remotely located pilot. However, operational complexity, operational pace, and a need to function in communication denied environments necessitate a trend toward autonomous unmanned vehicles. Autonomous systems that make independent decisions in complex engagements, such as the Navy’s Autonomous Aerial Cargo Unmanned System, are currently under development and will require development and operational testing within the next 3-5 years. Testing of autonomous systems presents some unique and vexing challenges. For instance, the infinite number of variations of test conditions that can exist to stimulate autonomous behaviors and the complexity of the interactions that can occur among multiple autonomous systems combine to make comparative measurement of autonomous system performance extremely difficult. Also, the inherent unpredictability of decision making by autonomous systems may result in decisions that are considered unsafe by managers of live test ranges. Advanced test and evaluation techniques that focus on the unique challenges of autonomy represent a clear and increasing need within the DoD. The Safe Testing of Autonomy in Complex, Interactive Environments (TACE) Program is a research initiative to develop an advanced test infrastructure that can measure the performance of autonomous systems operating in complex Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) environments while ensuring that the autonomous system does not violate range safety policy. This paper will provide an overview of the TACE hardware and software architecture and will highlight the LVC testing that has been performed at the Aberdeen Test Center to validate TACE capabilities. A discussion of anticipated transition activities with DoD partner programs will also be provided. CYBER OPERATIONAL ARCHITECTURE TRAINING SYSTEM – CYBER FOR ALL 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15108 Dr. David “Fuzzy” Wells, IPA, CMSP USPACOM J81 / Cyber War Innovation Center Camp H.M. Smith, H Derek Bryan USPACOM J81 / Ingenia Services, Inc. Camp H.M. Smith, H Current methods for conducting cyber training are incompatible with the traditional, simulation-based training architectures used to conduct battlestaff training. As a result there is little to no interaction between the cyber domain and the traditional warfighting domains during exercises. This situation does not accurately reflect the current operational environment nor does it address the Secretary of Defense’s (SECDEF) and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s (CJCS) directives and guidance for incorporating realistic cyberspace conditions into major Department of Defense (DoD) exercises. The Cyber Operational Architecture Training System (COATS) is a U.S. DoD Modeling & Simulation Coordination Office (M&SCO) High-Level Task (HLT) that integrates existing cyber range environments, traditional simulation architectures, operational networks, and cyber emulations to safely and securely synchronize and deliver realistic cyber effects to the entire battlestaff – cyber for all. In doing so COATS provides an integrated and contested training environment where operators plan, execute and experience realistic cyberspace operations and conditions in all domains. This paper describes the key components of the COATS architecture, including the application of network guards and the first draft of a cyber data exchange model, lessons learned from the demonstration and employment of COATS during three U.S. Forces Korea exercises, and recommendations for future cyber and traditional modeling and simulation capability research, development, test and evaluation. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 11 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MEASURING VIRTUAL SIMULATION’S VALUE IN TRAINING EXERCISES USMC USE CASE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15114 Nathan Jones & Greg Seavers Christin Capriglione MCSC PM TRASYS NAWCTSD Orlando, FL Orlando, FL In 2013, Lieutenant General (LTGen.) John A. Toolan, former Commanding General (CG) of First Marine Expeditionary Force (I MEF), requested incorporating previously non-interoperable and ‘stove-piped’ virtual and constructive Training Aids, Devices, Simulators and Simulations (TADSS) at I MEF’s First Marine Expeditionary Brigade’s (1st MEB’s) Large Scale Exercise 2014 (LSE-14) to demonstrate that Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) TADSS could collectively stimulate a Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Commander’s Common Operational Picture (COP). The expected outcome would be an operationally-effective MEF with capabilities to conduct full-spectrum military operations with a COP stimulated with data feeds from LVC entities; while providing training to both the primary (battlestaff) and secondary (supporting unit) training audiences. The objective of this assessment was to measure the training value gained. A measurable training value of utilizing virtual TADSS in a live exercise could have the potential to impact the historical and traditionally biased paradigm to train everything live whenever possible within the Marine Corps. This paper presents the results of the training value assessment of augmenting the live training event with virtual TADSS. It provides impacts of virtual integration on training efficacy achieved for primary and secondary training audiences. Included is the training value construct, defined assessment approach, limitations, results (both immediate and post event impacts), and efficiencies in terms of cost plus cost avoidance. Recommendations and discussions focus on: (1) identified needs for improvements in exercise planning and tools to facilitate more efficient satisfaction of training objectives for primary and secondary training audiences, (2) develop training-related human performance measures in TADSS to measure performance against training objectives, and (3) define an encompassing methodology for assessing training value of training solutions to inform requirements and acquisition decision makers. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-1 Assessment and Evaluation; Isolating Effects 1600 Student Retention in STEM Career Paths: Primary Influences on the Decision to Stay or Leave (15018) 1630 Overcoming the Challenge of Evaluating Skills Transfer from Training to Job (15151) 1700 Measuring a Moving Target: Validating Deployed Training Courses (15189) NOTES 12 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts STUDENT RETENTION IN STEM CAREER PATHS: PRIMARY INFLUENCES ON THE DECISION TO STAY OR LEAVE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15018 Jennifer Winner Air Force Research Laboratory Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH Michael D. Coovert, University of South Florida Tampa, FL LT Christopher Faxon United States Air Force Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH Extracurricular programs for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) content for middle and high school students are growing in number and are distributed utilizing in-class learning, after school clubs and activities and summer internship programs. It is often the case that anecdotal evidence of an internship program’s effectiveness is plentiful but quantitative data to support this evidence is lacking. In this paper we discuss how the existing organizational turnover literature may be leveraged to explore student interest and retention in STEM career paths. This approach was inspired by the summer modeling and simulation (M&S) program conducted by the Air Force Research Laboratory’s (AFRL) Gaming Research Integration for Learning Laboratory (GRILLTM). We describe the basic features of the GRILL™ program and classify dimensions in behavioral change that have emerged over four years of the program. By interpreting these data through the theoretical framework of retention and turnover, specifically focused on organizational commitment, job satisfaction, fit, stress, and career intentions, we develop a more complete picture of factors associated with student entrance into STEM disciplines, continuance through educational and training programs, and entry into the STEM workforce. OVERCOMING THE CHALLENGE OF EVALUATING SKILLS TRANSFER FROM TRAINING TO JOB 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15151 Ms. Toumnakone (Annie) Hester & Dr. Jay Brimstin Maneuver Center of Excellence Fort Benning, GA One of the long-standing challenges in the academic community has been evaluating the transfer of learning from the classroom to on the job performance (McDonald, 2010). Although billions of dollars are spent on training annually, some studies suggested that only 10-15% of training content is transferred to behavioral changes on the job (Lancaster, Milia, & Cameron, 2013). This has also been a challenge in the military training setting. The 19D One Station Unit (OSUT) training course is the initial entry training for the Army’s Cavalry Scouts that combines both basic combat training and advanced individual training. Among the skills taught to these new soldiers is land navigation, which is a fundamental skill necessary for successful performance of all Cavalry Scouts. The land navigation training provided to these soldiers in OSUT was significantly changed in late 2014 in an effort to improve the competence of graduating soldiers. An evaluation of this new training curriculum showed a significant improvement in soldier competence, but the challenge was to determine whether the improved learning outcomes resulted in improved job performance for these soldiers once they arrived in their first unit of assignment. This paper describes the methodology used to evaluate the degree to which newly assigned Cavalry Scouts were able to apply the land navigation skills learned in initial entry training in their first unit of assignment. The methodology applied in the evaluation consisted of establishing a baseline assessment, provided by unit leaders of newly assigned soldiers in selected units, and then using the same measures and leaders to assess newly arrived soldiers who had experienced the improved land navigation curriculum. Further, this paper reports on the degree to which the improved curriculum resulted in improved soldier performance in their first unit of assignment and the challenges soldiers encountered in applying their skills. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 13 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MEASURING A MOVING TARGET: VALIDATING DEPLOYED TRAINING COURSES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15189 Timothy R. Brock, PhD, CPT, ID(S&L+) & Denise R. Stevens, EdD General Dynamics Information Technology Orlando, FL The Veteran Benefits Administration implemented a new requirement to validate the effectiveness of new or revised elearning courseware after deploying it to the field using the total population as samples of the target audience. In the past, the validation effort occurred in a controlled environment using a small sample of the population prior to fielding the course. The methodologies used with the small sample population were the U.S. Army’s Sequential Validation or Fixed Validation. Because of the push to deploy the required entry-level and refresher/recurring training quicker (as well as cheaper without sacrificing quality), course effectiveness validation is now conducted post-deployment. This mandate poses several challenges, one of which is how to determine whether a training course is effective when it is deployed to the field and completed by government employees expected to simultaneously meet their fast-paced daily production requirements in a high-stress work environment. This paper reports how an argument-based approach is being assessed as an alternative courseware validation process that provides practical evidence to allow reasoned, datadriven interpretations and conclusions regarding the effectiveness of a deployed course. The approach uses both qualitative and quantitative data to establish reasoned arguments to make the evidence-based interpretations of the data. This paper discusses how this argument-based framework for measuring, analyzing, and reporting validation results is evolving to make reasoned determinations about the effectiveness of deployed e-learning products conducted in uncontrolled work environments. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-2 Full STEM Ahead 1600 Enhancing Good Stranger Skills: A Method and Study (15071) 1630 Curriculum GPS: An Adaptive Curriculum Generation and Planning System (15369) Notes 14 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ENHANCING GOOD STRANGER SKILLS: A METHOD AND STUDY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15071 Robert Hubal, Mike van Lent, Bob Marinier, Chris Kawatsu, Bob Bechtel Soar Technology, Inc. Ann Arbor, MI A good stranger (GS) is a professional who can effectively integrate tact and tactics, in order to create positive outcomes in difficult social encounters. For military personnel, creating positive social outcomes enhances mission effectiveness and force security, and supports broader strategic and tactical objectives. Some evidence suggests that military personnel may come into situations with preconceived ideas, or frames, about how to behave, not all of which involve GS tactics. Deliberate training in a variety of such situations is required to gain more effective control of people and situations. As part of a large DARPAfunded program maximizing especially high-risk, high-consequence interactions occurring in unfamiliar social terrain, we investigated how to train military personnel on GS skills in order to adapt to and successfully manage these interactions. Training was based on a theoretical structure for GS skills-based interaction; generally this flow maps to the basic sequencing for most interactions that produce positive end states: An approach, a period of framing, orientation and sensemaking, followed by engagement in the evolving business of the encounter. This engagement often involves necessary rapport-building, trouble recovery, and appropriate departure. We conducted an experiment with students at the Infantry Basic Officers Leader Course at Ft. Benning using a browser-based tool developed under the DARPA funding. We presented 32 students with a series of storylines, some having multiple injects, and asked the students to demonstrate their perception of relevant cues in a scene as they observed the interaction depicted by the storyline. We found this training to have a positive effect in increasing behaviors associated with a GS frame. In this paper we detail the training approach, describe our study, and offer recommendations on improving GS skills training in military personnel. CURRICULUM GPS: AN ADAPTIVE CURRICULUM GENERATION AND PLANNING SYSTEM 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15369 Mustafa İlhan Akbaş, Prateek Basavaraj Michael Georgiopoulos Özlem Garibay, Ivan Garibay Department of Electrical Engineering Office of Research and Commercialization and Computer Science University of Central Florida University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Orlando, Florida In educational systems, there has been an increasing interest for the innovative applications such as educational data mining and predictive analytics. These applications are utilized by the institutions for fulfilling academic missions and for improving the utilization of institutional resources. In this paper, we propose the “Curriculum GPS”, an adaptive curriculum generation and planning system, to provide a quantitative model and an interactive system that helps to grow and maintain programs with high retention and satisfaction rates in college, military or corporate education. The Curriculum GPS is composed of three main components: Curriculum analysis, historical data mining and an adaptive course sequence generation. The existing literature demonstrates how curricular efficiency correlates to student academic success in terms of graduation and retention rates. Therefore we first use an approach from the literature to analyze the curriculum under discussion as a directed graph by considering the conditions among courses such as prerequisite requirements. We conduct network analysis in this graph and compare our results with the catalog of courses currently in use. Then we combine this analysis with the historical data of the students and courses to train our model and develop our system’s database. The resulting system uses this training to create a set of quantitative recommendations for each student depending on her individual data such as passed/remaining courses, grades and time to graduate. The system also allows running what-if scenarios to test the outcomes of different choices by students. Therefore it is advantageous for students, instructors and advisors. The system is being developed for the Information Technology based departments of one of the largest universities in US by using the curricula and student datasets from the last thirty semesters. Initial results suggest this novel system provides both insight and improvement for the institutional education. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 15 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-3 Full STEM Ahead 0830 Mars Game: Creating and Evaluating an Engaging Educational Game (15105) 0900 The Secret for STEM Success: Employing Technology for Math Proficiency (15145) 0930 Inquiry and Design Approach to STEM Education Using Project-based Learning (15238) Notes MARS GAME: CREATING AND EVALUATING AN ENGAGING EDUCATIONAL GAME 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15105 Kevin Dill & Spencer Frazier Lockheed Martin Mission Systems & Training Burlington, MA Barbara Freeman Standards Work / UC Berkeley Quincy, MA Juan Benito Cooperative Entertainment Inc. Raleigh, NC Games have been studied for some time as a possible supplement to classroom-based learning and training, yet questions remain about how best to create the content. How can learning and gaming be merged in a way that does not diminish the positive aspects of either? Games that poorly integrate the educational component suffer for failing to teach, and games that poorly design the entertainment component suffer because they fail to engage the student. The content, and its comprehension by students, must then be evaluated to determine whether learning actually occurred. This paper describes the design, implementation, and evaluation of a game – the Mars Game prototype – that has been crafted from the beginning with the intent of emphasizing the educational content and the player’s engagement (i.e. the “fun”) in equal measure. The game teaches 9th and 10 th grade math and programming concepts, and aligns to the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. The results of a randomized control study performed with students from a U.S. high school are provided. The study evaluated the effect of the Mars Game prototype on students learning and engagement. The study demonstrated that the game statistically significantly improved learning outcomes against a comparison group. The study also showed that the treatment group scored significantly higher than the control group on engagement and deep immersion in the gameplay. These evaluations provide encouraging results reinforcing the design goals set out for the game as well as the efficacy of game-based learning – when you have a truly engaging game. 16 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THE SECRET FOR STEM SUCCESS: EMPLOYING TECHNOLOGY FOR MATH PROFICIENCY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15145 Edward P. Harvey, Jr. Marvin G. Fuller, Ph.D. Edward P. Harvey, III ATLT, LLC Oglethorpe Charter School Harvard University Virginia Beach, VA Savannah, GA Cambridge, MA This paper proposes an effective, affordable, and practical approach to increasing the number of successful Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) high school and college graduates. Currently, the primary barrier for U.S. students pursuing STEM degrees is math proficiency, and the problem is ubiquitous among secondary schools systems and colleges. The paper presents experiences and use cases that provide an insight as to why the math proficiency problem exists. The paper highlights considerations as to why the U.S. is ranked 27 out of 34 Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in math proficiency; why only 40% of U.S. high school graduates who attend college are prepared for college-level math; and why only 13% of math proficient middle school students become college graduates with a STEM degree. The paper also addresses costs to students, schools, and the government in terms of time, tuition, and subsidies for students to earn STEM degrees. It then presents an educational strategy for the integrated use of serious games, software tutoring agents, and webbased technologies to improve math instruction, review, and remediation. This paper provides an in-depth discussion on the design, development, testing, validation, and deployment of a comprehensive algebra readiness program. The program integrates serious game technologies, software tutoring agents, online math content, and web-based student performance reports. The program was developed by integrating state and national mathematics standards with commercial game and U.S. DoD training system technologies. It includes 130 foundational arithmetic and algebraic skills students must master to achieve and maintain STEM proficiency. Efficacy study results presented in the paper highlight use of the program by middle school, high school, and college students. Finally, lessons learned are described that can assist in the development of a set of best practices for developing and using technology-based STEM educational tools. INQUIRY AND DESIGN APPROACH TO STEM EDUCATION USING PROJECT-BASED LEARNING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15238 Danielle McNeely & Robert Seltzer NAWCTSD Orlando, FL Susan Nelson AUVSI Foundation Arlington, VA Dr. Stephen Priselac & Dr. Nancy Priselac nCASE Uniontown, Pennsylvania Eileen Smith University of Central Florida Orlando, FL Heather Norton & Alicia Frascati Orlando Science Center Orlando, FL Abdul Siddiqui PEO STRI Orlando, FL In the 21st century it is time to effectively apply the Chinese Proverb, “Tell me and I’ll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I’ll understand” to Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) K-12 education (Edwards and Muir, 2004). An effective means to apply this proverb to STEM learning is through the use of combining Project-Based Learning (PBL) with Inquiry and Design (I&D) Instruction. PBL is accomplished by conducting a comprehensive study of a particular topic by means of engaging at several different decision making junctures (Moursund, Kafai, Sandoval, Enyedy, Nixon, Herrera, and Stewart, 2002). Currently PBL activities are used extensively in post-secondary academia and by industry (internships). Learners who are exposed to PBL environments not only actively apply engineering and science understanding, but also tend to obtain a more concrete foundation of science and mathematical knowledge (Lou, Shih, Diez, and Tseng, 2011). Research indicates it is essential to engage a learner’s interest in a technical career path by establishing a link between the theoretical knowledge and its application to solve real life problems early on in the learning experience (Verma, 2011). I&D, which is attracting interest among STEM educators nationwide, emulates the scientific method in the classroom. I&D is a student-centered approach emphasizing the integration of inquiry (science, technology and mathematics) and design (engineering) elements. The intent of this paper is to illustrate how three existing PBL programs can be successfully combined with the I&D teaching methodology to effectively teach K-12 STEM education curricula. The three programs are: 1) Engineering our Future, 2) Materials World Modules, and 3) SeaPerch. From these exemplar programs, schools can better decide with confidence how to adopt these or similar STEM programs into their formal and informal STEM programs. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 17 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-4 Getting In Front of It 1030 Antecedents of Adaptive Collaborative Learning Environments (15211) 1100 Adaptable Resilience Training for Transitioning Veterans Using Existing Technologies (15285) 1130 The Changing Face of Military Learning (15327) Notes ANTECEDENTS OF ADAPTIVE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15211 Robert A. Sottilare, Ph.D., Joan H. Johnston, PhD., & Anne M. Sinatra, Ph.D. US Army Research Laboratory Orlando, FL Shawn Burke, Ph.D. University of Central Florida Orlando , FL Eduardo Salas, Ph.D. Rice University Houston, TX Heather Holden, Ph.D. Mount Washington University Manchester, NH This paper explores the effect of critical precursors to realizing successful collaborative instructional environments in terms of their interaction within the learning effect model (Sottilare, 2012; Fletcher & Sottilare, 2013; Sottilare, 2013; Sottilare, Ragusa, Hoffman & Goldberg, 2013) and measurable relationships to team learning in the literature. We evaluated potential antecedents of successful collaborative instruction in the literature through a large-scale meta-analysis. Adaptive collaborative learning environments are group or team instruction where the challenge level of the learning experience is driven by the shared states (e.g., cognitive, affective, physical) and team performance. Independent of the computer technology, the methodology we used examined team behaviors which included, but were not limited to: cognition, communications, coordination, conflict resolution, cooperation, coaching, and leadership. Recommendations about which team behaviors are critical antecedents to the optimal selection of instructional strategies, tactics, and techniques (policies) during adaptive training and educational experiences are also discussed with respect to their effect on team learning. This research is important to the development of effective software-based agents for adaptive systems (e.g. Intelligent Tutoring Systems) where these agents are responsible for planning and executing actions based on the needs of each unique team. 18 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ADAPTABLE RESILIENCE TRAINING FOR TRANSITIONING VETERANS USING EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15285 Ms. Jill Shepherd & Ms. Jennifer Ukwa Booz Allen Hamilton McLean, VA Suicide rates among Military Service Members (SM) and Veterans remain a crisis despite the efforts of the Pentagon and Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) to connect these individuals to support, prevention, and emergency resources. According to the 2012 VA Suicide Data Report, roughly 8,000 veterans are thought to die by suicide each year. Many contributing factors are directly associated with military experiences such as battle wounds, deployment stress, grief, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress and other mental disorders. This paper describes how, recognizing that transitioning SMs need a personalized set of resilience skills that change as their circumstances change, the Defense Suicide Prevention Office (DSPO) and Transition to Veterans Program Office (TVPO) collaborated to develop training that reaches SMs at one of the most suicide-vulnerable points in their careers, the transition to Veteran status. Without an option to deliver this sensitive content in a face-to-face setting, DSPO and TVPO had to work within the constraints of deploying their resilience training on an existing Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM)-compliant Learning Management System (LMS). The team aspired to create training that could adapt to individuals’ needs, while also adapting to the audience needs over time. The paper describes how the designers created a Resilience Gauge that, when taken at the beginning of the course, customizes the content to the learner’s needs. The paper describes the research behind the Resilience Gauge, which was developed with experts in both resilience and survey design. The Resilience Gauge is a tool that allows learners to self-report their current resilience skill by answering 25 scenario-based multiple-choice questions, then assembles a custom set of content based on four domains of resilience (mind, body, spirit, social) and three proficiency levels (beginner, intermediate, advanced). The paper describes how designers can repurpose this gauge as an efficient way to create adaptable content. THE CHANGING FACE OF MILITARY LEARNING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15327 Sae Schatz, Ph.D ADL Initiative . Orlando, FL David Fautua, Ph.D. Joint Staff J7, Joint Training Suffolk, VA Julian Stodd SeaSalt Learning Bournemouth, UK Emilie Reitz Alion Suffolk, VA Globalization, social media, ever-increasing computing power, and the proliferation of low-cost advanced technologies have created a level of worldwide complexity and rapid change never before seen. To remain competitive in this environment, the US Department of Defense and our coalition allies must identify new ways to empower our forces. In this paper, we assert that part of that solution includes increased investments in our Human Dimension. Specifically, we argue that military personnel require an expanded set of competencies, higher levels of nuanced skills such as critical thinking and emotional intelligence, and more efficient and agile pathways to expertise, and that achieving these outcomes depends, at least in part, on revising the military learning enterprise. Towards this end, we outline a vision for the future of military learning, painting a picture of the “art of the possible” and proposing a roadmap that outlines five enabling conditions needed to achieve this future vision. The conditions include: (1) Cultivate ubiquitous learner-centric, technology-enabled instruction; (2) Build upon the foundations of data-driven learning; (3) Foster a learning culture at the organizational level; (4) Encourage and empower social learning; and (5) Draw upon deliberate practices and the evidencebased body-of-knowledge from learning science. Enacting any one of these conditions will pose significant challenges, and particular science or technology gaps associated with each condition create additional hurdles. Nonetheless, we argue that the time is right, in terms of understanding and demand, to take action. One major step in that direction is to agree upon a shared grand strategy, that is a vision for our Human Dimension and the military learning system that empowers it. That is the professional dialog this paper attempts to help inform and encourage. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 19 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-5 Challenging the Game 1400 Game-Based Training for Human-Intelligence Skills (15067) 1430 A Conceptual Model of Pedagogic Design to Support Critical Thinking in Commanders (15075) Notes GAME-BASED TRAINING FOR HUMAN-INTELLIGENCE SKILLS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15067 John T. Miller, II Consortium Research Fellows Program and Capella University Fort Benning, GA Martin L. Bink U.S. Army Research Institute Fort Benning, GA The U.S. Army increasingly relies on game-based training as a tool for skill development in nontraditional areas such as moral–ethical decision-making, social–cultural awareness, and cognitive reasoning. The use of game-based exercises is nonetheless a novel approach for training human-intelligence tasks. Humanintelligence tasks are the actions related to collecting information from people and other sources (i.e., social networks, print and visual media) to identify elements, intentions, composition, strength, dispositions, tactics, equipment, personnel and capabilities. In U.S. Army, human-intelligence skills are taught in a week-long resident course called the Attack the Network (AtN) course. In order to determine the extent to which game-based training provides a meaningful and effective contribution to the development human-intelligence skills, two forms of scenario-based practical exercises were compared in the AtN. Course performance and perceptions of training were compared across students who completed traditional paper-based practical exercises to students who completed game-based practical exercises in the Army’s Enhance Dynamic Geo-social Environment (EDGE) desktop training environment. The EDGE practical exercises did no better in increasing end-of-course test scores than did traditional paper-based practical exercises. In addition, the paper-based practical exercises were perceived as more beneficial to learning and course outcomes as compared to the EDGE practical exercises. These results add to the growing literature that fails to find a relative advantage of game-based training. However, these data as well as insights from AtN instructors were used to determine how EDGE may have a greater impact on human-intelligence skills. These insights may have wider applicability for increasing game-based training effectiveness in other contexts. 20 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF PEDAGOGIC DESIGN TO SUPPORT CRITICAL THINKING IN COMMANDERS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15075 Kia Hong Tan, Teng Howe Lim & Boon Kee Soh DSO National Laboratories Singapore The use of serious games as a potential training solution has found traction in the militaries of many countries to meet the complex training needs of soldiers. Games repurposed as training platforms have become more immersive, emotionally engaging, and significantly less expensive as compared to fullfledged simulators. They can also be highly customizable, allow for easy and consistent repetition, and when designed well, create intrinsic motivation in users. Coupled with advances in cognitive and learning sciences which shed light on how humans learn as an individual and in a team, it is therefore timely for us to leverage on these emerging technologies for the next generation of training and learning systems in the military. In this paper, a conceptual model of pedagogic design is proposed to support the development of a serious game targeted at critical thinking for commanders. The paper explains how the model is used to represent theoretical approaches and to support game design. Key components to train critical thinking are distilled from the review of learning theories and game design recommendations. This establishes the starting point towards selecting appropriate processes, tools and resources to develop the game and learning scenarios. Components of the learning scenarios will be described and related to the appropriate theoretical approaches. Our assertion is that application of pedagogical processes, tools and techniques is useful to support a serious game development that is targeted at critical thinking for senior commanders. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-6 Instructors for the Force of Future 1600 Designing Instructor Support Tools for Virtual Shiphandling Training (15133) 1630 Hey, Remember to Add Motivational Design to Your E-learning (15030) 1700 Achieving Educational Excellence: What do Effective Instructors do? (15226) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 21 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts DESIGNING INSTRUCTOR SUPPORT TOOLS FOR VIRTUAL SHIPHANDLING TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15133 Martin Voshell, Ryan Kilgore, Christopher Hogan, Timothy R. McEwen, David Young Charles River Analytics Cambridge, MA Practice and experience are fundamental to seamanship and shiphandling training, but are significantly limited by platform availability and at-sea time. With hands-on experience and at-sea assignments available only to a subset of personnel at a given time, virtual environments (VEs) have the potential to provide a complementary and cost- effective method to support task mastery without putting lives and platforms at risk. VE training systems, such as the Conning Officer Virtual Environment (COVE) currently used by the US Navy for training ship-handling skills, have great potential value to increase training exposure. However, even these virtual systems are resource-intensive because they require highly trained instructors to closely monitor individual students’ progress and provide targeted coaching and feedback. The growing popularity of VE-based training approaches is rapidly outpacing the number of available instructors, who need better tools to support their delivery of high-quality training to larger numbers of students. In this paper, we describe ongoing research and development efforts to extend the Navy’s VE training capabilities by creating work-support tools and dashboard displays that enable COVE instructors to efficiently monitor and manage larger numbers of students with VE training. Based on design principles that support attention management, we have created a series of linked alerting displays to support improved instructor supervision across multiple student training sessions. We also present our analytic approach, provide design implications and initial instructor support concepts, and discuss how our approach and initial results are generalizable to other VE-based instructional settings. HEY, REMEMBER TO ADD MOTIVATIONAL DESIGN TO YOUR E-LEARNING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15030 Geir Isaksen Commander, NoD University College Oslo, Akershus Fortress Siren Elise Frøytlog Hole Project Manager, Transform AS Oslo Student motivation is an essential component of all educational and learning processes. Without motivation, students lack cognitive presence resulting in little, if any, learning. In the traditional classroom setting, it’s up to the teacher to facilitate and maintain student motivation. In an e-learning course however, there is less teacher or facilitator presence and the learner is left alone to interact with the instruction mostly alone. E-learning designers and developers must integrate appropriate motivational elements to ensure the learner sustains his/her motivation throughout the entire instruction to maximize the learning outcome. Over the past few years the Norwegian Armed Forces (NoAF) has incorporated motivational design elements focused on promoting and sustaining motivation into our e-learning courses based on John Keller's ARCS Model of Motivational Design. This paper outlines the rationale, methodology, and resulting implementation. 22 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ACHIEVING EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE: WHAT DO EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTORS DO? 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15226 Heidi Keller-Glaze, Jonathan Bryson & Ray Morath William R. Bickley U.S. Army Research Institute With the publication of the Army Learning Model (ALM; U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 2011), the Army seeks to shift the nature of instruction from instructor-centric to learner-centric and integrate technology into training and education to a greater extent than has been done in the past. Specifically, the ALM -solving approaches in the classroom, with instructors Increase the use of interactive technology in learning. Recent research efforts to develop a framework to select, develop, and evaluate Army instructors revealed a lack of requirements for instructors of adult learners in an environment of interactive, engaging, and learner-centric education. Through a review of military and education literature and a workshop with subject matter experts, a definition of an effective instructor was developed initially. Subsequently, 13 work behaviors and 32 knowledge elements, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) were identified as being necessary for an instructor to be effective in a learner-centric environment. These behaviors and KSAOs were then used to generate tasks performed by instructors in a learner-centric classroom. Data were gathered from instructors regarding the importance of these tasks, the frequency with which they are performed, and the effectiveness of instructor training in teaching these tasks. The behaviors, KSAOs, and tasks can be used in the selection, development, and evaluation of instructors who can effectively implement learner-centric practices and technology into their instruction. The framework developed through the research and analysis will be described along with the next steps to identify training for Army instructors. Follow on work with the behaviors, KSAOs, and tasks is focused on identifying training for Army instructors to prepare them to implement the directives of ALM. This training is intended to complement the training Army instructors currently receive. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-7 It’s All About the Learning 0830 Using a Skill Acquisition Theory as a Framework for the Army Learning (15125) 0915 Transmedia (Social) Learning in the Wild: DoD SkillBridge for Transitioning Service Members (15162) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 23 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts INNOVATIVELY APPLYING SKILL ACQUISITION THEORY TO THE ARMY LEARNING MODEL 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15125 LTC Glenn A. Hodges, Ph.D. Human Dimension Division (HDD) Army Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC) Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) FT Eustis, Virginia The Army Learning Concept (ALC) for 2015 discusses a continuous adaptive learning model and multiple 21 st century competencies that have been described as critical for U.S. Army Soldiers if the Army is to maintain its competitive advantage into the future. Unfortunately, neither the ALC for 2015 nor the Army Training Concept (ATC) for 20122020 provide an instantiation of a model or a description of how to integrate or employ new ideas or approaches into training and education programs and activities to obtain the desired 21st century competencies. Attempts at transitioning training and learning environments from traditional “brick and mortar” settings to the “point of need” leveraging new multi-media technologies and approaches are numerous and ongoing. These efforts have not been coordinated, synchronized or similarly assessed due to the lack of an integrated framework. This paper conveys a possible solution derived using experiential learning theory and skill acquisition research conducted by Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1980). The Dreyfus model is inlaid into a current military career, creating the framework for the development and use of experiential learning inventories (ELI) and competence-based assessments (CBA). Examples of existing CBA are provided and recommendations supporting the development of ELI are discussed. The data implications of this proposal are acknowledged. It is believed that if ELI and CBA are used and punctuate a career (e.g. upon initial entry, upon arrival to and exit from duty assignments, pre- and post- training/education, prior to promotions, etc.) they will help to inform the development and refinement of new and existing instructional methods and technologies useful for training and educating the current and future force. Additionally, the information obtained from ELI and CBA will help to support the efforts of human resource managers and commanders in their efforts to manage their human capital talent. TRANSMEDIA (SOCIAL) LEARNING IN THE WILD: EXPLORING A CONTINUUM OF SUPPORT FOR TRANSITIONING SERVICE MEMBERS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15162 Elaine M. Raybourn, Ph.D. Frank C. DiGiovanni, SES MajGen Tom Jones, USMC (Ret) Sandia National Labs* / ADL DASD, Force Readiness & Training Outdoor Odyssey Orlando, FL Washington, DC Boswell, PA While social learning is not a new construct, we now have the ability to extend learning across place and time instantaneously with social media and digital tools. As we interact in new ways with multiple media we discover new approaches like transmedia learning, which leverages both social learning and social media. Transmedia learning is engagement-driven, learner-centric, unfolds across multiple media, and is designed to promote social learning. An I/ITSEC paper published in 2013 utilized the example of Warrior-Diplomat and was the first in a series introducing transmedia learning strategies to meet the demands of next generation learning. The present paper is the second in the series and expands on theories discussed in the 2015 I/ITSEC tutorial “Transmedia Learning in the Wild.” While the tutorial uses Warrior-Athlete as an example, the present paper departs from the tutorial and the 2013 paper by honing in on one aspect of transmedia learning—the practice of social learning as it applies to two approaches for preparing Veterans and transitioning Service members for the civilian workforce. In the spirit of the definition of transmedia learning provided above, conference participants who review the 2013 paper and attend both the 2015 paper and tutorial presentations will obtain unique and complementary information from each presentation about transmedia (social) learning in the wild, or as it naturally occurs in a cultural context. The present paper is divided into three sections. The first section introduces the need to retrain transitioning members of the Force and provides a description of the Instruction (DoDI) 1322.29 issued in 2014, titled "Job Training, Employment Skills Training, Apprenticeships, and Internships (JTEST-AI) for Eligible Service." DoD SkillBridge implements this instruction and is a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) Force Readiness and Training initiative to connect transitioning Service members with civilian training opportunities. Semper Fi Odyssey, a 6-day intensive transition-assistance and career advancement program for injured veterans, is also presented to illustrate a range of social learning experiences presented as a continuum. The next section introduces three theories from learning science, cognitive psychology, and communication that support a social learning continuum. The theories support 5 key design features: Learning context, culture & community, calibration, and connections. The last section suggests a data collection plan for future measurement of digital engagement as it applies to transmedia (social) learning in the wild. 24 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320D ED-8 Make a Mobile 1030 Innovative Mobile Technologies for Assessing and Enhancing Soldier Performance (15082) 1100 A Reference Model for Designing Mobile Learning and Performance Support (15225) 1130 Development and Evaluation of Mobile Adaptive Training Technologies (15231) Notes INNOVATIVE MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES FOR ASSESSING AND ENHANCING SOLDIER PERFORMANCE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15082 Krista L. Ratwani & Courtney R. Dean Aptima, Inc. Washington, DC Scott Flanagan Sophia Speira Carthage, NC Camilla Knott & Frederick Diedrich Aptima, Inc. Washington, DC Jennifer S. Tucker Army Research Institute Ft. Benning, GA A key element of the Army’s Human Dimension Concept is the need to prepare Soldiers to thrive in conditions of uncertainty while they contend with ambiguous and amorphous threats. To prepare for such conditions, advanced talent management strategies are needed to facilitate Soldier development across the cognitive, physical, and social domains. Comprehensive talent management systems must ultimately leverage assessment tools to gather large amounts of data to enable a detailed determination of Soldier strengths and weaknesses and facilitate continuous learning. The question remains, however, about how best to achieve this goal. This paper reports lessons learned from research with the Army Reconnaissance Course (ARC), Ft. Benning, GA, to assess and track student performance over time in both performance outcomes (e.g., fundamental skills, understanding information needs) and leader attributes (e.g., anticipation, accountability). The final ARC performance assessment system included a mobile application to record student observations, a method to link those observations to key competencies, and a method for presenting trends over time. The trending method enabled student data to be aggregated across instructors and over classes to demonstrate larger changes in performance over time. In this paper, we present the methodology for developing this assessment system, results from an evaluation of the system, and reactions to employing the full assessment system during a course. The findings reflect the results from the in situ testing and use of the assessment system to include additional features which facilitate future utility and promote usability. Implications of the research are discussed to provide suggestions and future research questions to inform the creation of a comprehensive Soldier assessment system as the Army strives toward effective talent management strategies. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 25 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts A REFERENCE MODEL FOR DESIGNING MOBILE LEARNING AND PERFORMANCE SUPPORT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15225 Peter Berking, Jason Haag Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) Initiative During recent years of increased smartphone and tablet adoption there has been a growing interest in how to improve training and performance opportunities with mobile learning and mobile performance support. Increasingly, instructional designers and developers of traditional eLearning are realizing that the design paradigms for mobile learning are significantly different. Results from a needs assessment conducted for the Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL)'s Mobile Training Implementation Framework (MoTIF) project in 2014 identified a strong demand for a mobile learning design model that can effectively inform, situate, and invite consideration of tactical learning approaches, mobile usage patterns, and mobile affordances. This paper is based on nearly three years of research findings on mobile learning and performance support as part of the MoTIF project. The findings led to the development of a reference model that could improve the design of training and performance support solutions for mobile devices. The reference model components were substantiated by the quantitative and qualitative data collected during the needs assessment and will be iteratively refined and evaluated for improvements in the future. While the model will continue to capture new considerations as an innovative mobile learning design strategy, it can actually be leveraged and adopted by DoD education and training initiatives today as either a conceptual framework or decision support tool. DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF MOBILE ADAPTIVE TRAINING TECHNOLOGIES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15231 Rodney Long Army Research Laboratory Orlando, FL Jessie Hyland & Joanne Barnieu ICFI International Fairfax, VA This research involves development and evaluation of adaptive training strategies. The current prototype mobile training technology was designed to include an adaptive feature within one instructional cycle (at the Terminal Objective or Module level). Based on pre-assessment questions, the learner’s sequence within the instructional cycle will be adapted accordingly. Should certain learning objectives be considered mastered via determined pre-requisite knowledge, those associated lessons will be collapsed in the curriculum yet accessible if desired by the learner. Additionally, after completing a lesson, the learner can receive guidance from the system if he or she answers the intermittent assessment item (Check on Learning) incorrectly and is also prompted to return to the lesson content should the guidance not assist the learner in answering the assessment item. To examine the effectiveness of the adaptive training, we conducted an experiment to compare students receiving the adaptive version of the prototype (i.e., treatment condition) versus those receiving the non-adaptive version (i.e., control condition). Specifically, participants were compared on the following dimensions: learner reactions; training efficiency; and training effectiveness. On learner reactions, we found some preliminary descriptive evidence that participants in the treatment condition were more engaged and held more favorable perceptions of the training adaptability than those in the control condition but the difference was not statistically significant. Evidence on the potential unintended negative consequences of the adaptive training was inconclusive. On training efficiency, we found the adaptive training to be more efficient than its non-adaptive counterpart, as expected. On training effectiveness, participants in the treatment condition performed as well as their counterparts in the control condition on an independent hands-on performance test. Our findings are encouraging but highlight the need to continue robust research in tandem with the development and integration of new technologies in order to realize the full potential of adaptive training. 26 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-1 Easy Button 1400 Automated Simulation Creation from Military Operations Documents (15227) 1430 Scheduling Training to Manage Acquisition & Decay (15340) 1500 M&S as a Service: Paradigm for Future Simulation Environments (15324) Notes AUTOMATED SIMULATION CREATION FROM MILITARY OPERATIONS DOCUMENTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15227 John Balint, Jan M. Allbeck, Michael R. Hieb George Mason University Fairfax, VA The creation of virtual reality simulations for training or analysis is an arduous process requiring specialized knowledge. Graphical models and even animated, articulated figures can now be obtained from websites or hired artists. Even after these assets are obtained, putting scenes together and authoring character behaviors can be a lengthy process. Furthermore, ensuring that character behaviors will be successfully performed in a virtual environment is often a trial-and-error process. Automating the creation of these behaviors and facilitating their modification by Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) – as opposed to technicians – will shorten the time required and reduce costs. This paper presents a framework (VerbsEye) for using descriptive texts, such as military operations documents to semi automate simulation creation. While previous research, such as the WordsEye system, have created static scenes from natural language inputs, our framework further automates the process and includes the generation of agent behavior scripts from the text. Specifically, we present a text-to-scene system that generates 1) scene scripts and 2) agent behavior scripts for virtual environments. The spatial information required for the scenes is obtained both explicitly through prepositions found in the input text and implicitly from the described agent behaviors. Motion data used to depict agent behaviors is exploited to provide additional spatial constraints and assure the behaviors will be possible. Automated scene creation is challenging and unlikely to result in perfection. The VerbsEye framework is evaluated in terms of how well sample military operations documents can be used to generate scenes and behaviors. The specific metrics used are the percentage of scenes and behaviors in the sample operation documents successfully processed. Our framework shows how additional automation can be used to enable SMEs and technicians to better and more quickly create training tools and environments. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 27 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts SCHEDULING TRAINING TO MANAGE ACQUISITION & DECAY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15340 Mohammed Eslami, Ph.D. & Jared Freeman, Ph.D. Aptima, Inc. Washington, DC Scott Pappada, Ph.D. Aptima, Inc. Dayton, OH The accelerating effects of adaptive training systems are well established (Lesgold, 2012; Cohn & Fletcher, 2010). This power might be enhanced further by scheduling training to accelerate acquisition and scheduling re-training to reduce decay. Models of acquisition and decay have been available to support scheduling since the early days of memory research (Ebbinghaus, 1913). But these models are derived mainly from laboratory tasks that are learned and executed over seconds or minutes, and performed in isolation from competing tasks. The models are much less explanatory or predictive over real world tasks that are complex, learned and executed over hours and days, and situated in a river of daily assignments that impose the scientifically acknowledged cause of skill decay: interference with memory retrieval (Farr, 1987; Arthur, et al., 1998). In this paper, we propose a new approach to acquisition and decay modeling to make the science of skill acquisition and decay more useful and usable. The approach applies machine learning techniques to model skill acquisition and decay. We apply these methods to a large dataset from a game-ified working memory exercise, compare the performance of these methods with a conventional technique, and present the argument for applying these methods to predict learning and schedule training for realistically complex tasks such as system diagnosis and corrective maintenance. M&S AS A SERVICE: PARADIGM FOR FUTURE SIMULATION ENVIRONMENTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15324 Robert Siegfried aditerna GmbH Riemerling/Munich, Germany Tom van den Berg TNO The Hague, Netherlands This paper presents results of NATO activities in the area of “M&S as a Service” (MSaaS). It illustrates potential benefits with regards to quality, efficiency, and interoperability that may be achieved by MSaaS and provides an insight how some of the existing challenges are currently being addressed. As M&S products are highly valuable to NATO and military organizations it is essential that M&S products, data and processes are conveniently accessible to a large number of users as often as possible. This requires a new “M&S ecosystem” that has to support stand-alone use as well as integration of multiple simulated and real systems into a unified simulation environment whenever the need arises. Due to many factors, service-based approaches are considered to be very promising for realizing future simulation environments. This idea is known as “Modeling & Simulation as a Service” (MSaaS). NATO Modeling and Simulation Group 131 (“Modelling and Simulation as a Service: New concepts and Service Oriented Architectures”) has investigated the idea of “M&S as a Service” as a 1-year Specialist Team. MSG-131 defined a consistent MSaaS terminology and placed MSaaS into the wider context of the NATO C3 Classification Taxonomy. Second, an exhaustive overview about service-based approaches used in the M&S domain in NATO and Partner Nations was produced. Third, a comprehensive overview of existing service-oriented (reference) architectures in the M&S domain was produced. A more detailed investigation of MSaaS and first steps towards an incremental implementation of a “Federated M&S Eco-System” are objectives of MSG-136 (“Modelling and Simulation as a Service - Rapid deployment of interoperable and credible simulation environments”) which started its 3-year term in November 2014. This paper presents results of MSG-131 and current work done by MSG-136. 28 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S330C EC-2 Are We There Yet? 1400 Military Vehicle Training with Augmented Reality (15180) 1445 Modelling a Helicopter Training Continuum to Support System Transformation (15165) Notes MILITARY VEHICLE TRAINING WITH AUGMENTED REALITY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15180 Jonathan Brookshire, Taragay Oskiper, Vlad Branzoi, Supun Samarasekera & Rakesh Kumar SRI International Princeton, NJ Sean Cullen & Richard Schaffer Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training Burlington, MA In order to be effective in the field, the military trains warfighters to operate its many ground vehicles. The goals of training are for the warfighter to learn vehicle and weapon operations and dynamics (e.g., how the vehicle and gun turret work and “feel”) in live tactical situations. Additionally, because many vehicles require multiple operators (e.g., a gunner and driver), team coordination is an important element of the tactical training. The military employs both live and virtual reality training to achieve these goals. Live training, especially gunnery, requires significant facilities and range infrastructure and is also limited to specific sites due to safely restrictions. Such training events generally require travel/transportation to CTCs and ranges. Unfortunately, live training is expensive. In this paper, an augmented reality based vehicle training system is presented. The trainees are able to drive on physical terrain and engage virtual entities for tactical and gunnery training. By augmenting the real world using virtual entities and effects, along with existing training aids and devices, training anywhere and anytime is enabled. The details of the vehicle-borne augmented reality system for augmenting both the driver’s periscope and the gunner’s remote weapon sight are presented. The system relies on inertial measurements, cameras, and GPS to provide jitter free, robust and real-time 6-DOF (degree of freedom) pose estimation. These poses are used to render synthetic targets (e.g., dismounts, technical, target) to the driver and gunner. An iPad style instructor interfaces controls the augmented engagement and provides student scores. The system is evaluated on an Army Stryker vehicle operating in a real range. The consistency and quality of target insertions between the driver’s three augmented periscopes and the gunner’s augmented weapon sights are compared. The importance of each sensor is evaluated by removing its input and comparing. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 29 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MODELLING A HELICOPTER TRAINING CONTINUUM TO SUPPORT SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15165 Michael Johnstone, Vu Le, Burhan Khan, & Doug Creighton Centre for Intelligent Systems Research Geelong, Vic Ana Novak, Vivian Nguyen, & Luke Tracey Defence Science and Technology Organisation Melbourne, Vic This study investigates the role of system dynamics (SD) modeling to support strategic decision making for an aviation training continuum that is going through major change. The Australian helicopter training continuum (HTC) is currently undergoing transformation, with restructure and consolidation of training schools and training platforms across multiple services. In this research, we introduce a novel SD-based HTC simulation architecture to facilitate the discovery of relationships between student and instructor development and flow dynamics. The proposed simulation architecture employs hybrid push – pull flow control to quantify transience and estimate recovery time after a policy change or disturbance. This architecture allows for multiple student and instructor types, and their respective intake levels and pass rates. Here the instructor variables include availability, specialization and experience. Enos (2011) successfully explored the application of SD modeling to understand the behavior for combat aviation training in an individual school. This research employs a similar modeling philosophy, but takes a higher level view of the system by looking across multiple training schools, which introduces complexity due to pooling, latency and the amplification of affects across the system. The ability to identify causal relationships allowed stakeholders to develop a deeper understanding of the underlying systemic problems, such as delayed transitions between schools and instructor shortages, whilst the hybrid “push-pull” design allowed us to quantify the pooling of students between schools. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-4 Pinging and the Brain 1600 Cognitive Two-Way Interactions In an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment (15332) 1630 Modeling and Integrating Cognitive Agents Within the Emerging Cyber Domain (15232) 1700 Tablet Computer Call for Fire Simulation Proof of Concept Study Results (15008) Notes 30 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TOWARD COGNITIVE TWO-WAY INTERACTIONS IN AN IMMERSIVE VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15332 Brennan D. Cox, Harvey M. Edwards, Kathrine A. Service, Pinata H. Seth A. Reini Sessoms, Jose A. Dominguez, & Weimin Zheng Navy Experimental Diving Unit Naval Health Research Center Panama City Beach, FL San Diego, CA The use of Immersive Virtual Reality Environments (iVREs) for training and rehabilitation purposes is growing in popularity. An emerging topic in iVRE program development, particularly programs aimed at cognition enhancement, is implementing two-way interactions between the user’s cognitive state and the iVRE to achieve maximal effects. This process incurs several outstanding challenges. For example, although recent advances in electroencephalography (EEG) have revealed a number of neural correlates/signatures for a variety of operationally-relevant cognitive states (e.g., attentiveness, fatigue), most if not all of these neuromarkers have not been validated in iVREs. The current paper addresses this gap by describing efforts to achieve high quality EEG signals in an iVRE with millisecond-time synchronization between the two systems. To achieve these goals, we evaluated several mobile EEG systems, incorporated off-the-shelf hardware, and developed custom software to effectively implement the EEG devices into the Physical and Cognitive Operational Research Environment (PhyCORE), an iVRE located at the Naval Health Research Center in San Diego, California. As a result, the PhyCORE can now provide cognitive information about human subjects through on-line monitoring of brain activity patterns. Equipped with this capability, the PhyCORE is ready for further development of individualized training and rehabilitation programs based on the subjects’ cognitive states as assessed in realtime and in a real-life environment. The technical challenges and solutions described herein can be easily generalized and adapted for other iVREs, and represent a critical step toward optimization of the humanmachine interaction. MODELING AND INTEGRATING COGNITIVE AGENTS WITHIN THE EMERGING CYBER DOMAIN 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15232 Randolph M. Jones, Ryan O'Grady & Denise Nicholson Soar Technology Ann Arbor, MI Robert Hoffman, Larry Bunch & Jeffrey Bradshaw IHMC Pensacola, FL Ami Bolton Office of Naval Research Arlington, VA One of the elements missing from virtual environments in the emerging cyber domain is an element of active opposition. For example, in a training simulation the instructor assigns the student a task or objective, and the student then practices within the environment (the “cyber range”) until they feel comfortable with the task or are able to demonstrate the requisite level of mastery. The environment may have static defenses, such as access control or firewalls, or a fixed set of intrusion methods to defend against, but it typically lacks any active opposition that might adapt defensive or offensive actions (e.g., monitor logs, blocked connections, exploit switching or information gathering). This is akin to training fighter pilots against adversaries who know how to use their weapons, but do not have any tactical or strategic goals beyond that. This is unfortunate for two reasons: 1) it trains cyber operators to behave as though opponents do not have a tangible existence or do not have higher-level goals, and 2) it ignores an opportunity to tailor the student’s learning experience through adjustable adversary behavior. Cognitive agents have the potential to transform the cyber operations training experience. The application of cognitive agents to the roles of cyber offense and defense would provide a more complete cyber ecology for training purposes and thus a more realistic training experience for the student. There are two key challenges to creating such cyber agents: 1) modeling the complex, and continually evolving, processes of cyber operations within a cognitive architecture, and 2) defining the tools and data standards to enable cognitive agents to interoperate with networks in a portable way. This paper discusses novel models of cyber offensive and defensive behavior based on observation and elaboration of human expertise, as well as an approach to the creation of software adapters that translate from task-level actions to network-level events to support agent-network interoperability. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 31 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TABLET COMPUTER CALL FOR FIRE SIMULATION: PROOF OF CONCEPT STUDY RESULTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15008 James Reynolds, USMC Marine Corps Systems Command MCB Quantico, VA Craig Smith, USMC II Marine Expeditionary Force Camp Lejeune, NC Call for fire (CFF), the coordination of indirect artillery and mortar fires by a ground observer, is an ideal mission set for virtual environment (VE) training. CFF is a United States Marine Corps (USMC) core competency and is a perishable skill that requires frequent reinforcement training. The requirement to expose Marines to initial and recurrent CFF training is hampered by the expensive and time-consuming nature of live indirect fire training. The USMC currently has a CFF simulation training capability, but access is limited by the fixed site nature of the simulations. This paper presents the results of a proof-of-concept study that developed and tested a tablet-based CFF training simulation. The objective of this study was to investigate the comparative value of tablet-based CFF VE training. The research team designed and developed a tablet-based CFF prototype and then executed a user feedback experiment that compared the tablet solution to the USMC’s current personal computer (PC) based CFF simulation, ObserverSim. The comparison focused on end user opinions regarding the training value and effectiveness of the tablet’s multifunction interface relative to ObserverSim’s traditional mouse and keyboard interface. End users with and without previous CFF experience registered an overwhelming preference for the CFF tablet prototype (p=0.002). While the tablet prototype was primitive and of much lower fidelity than ObserverSim, participants liked the tablet’s ability to mimic real world physical motion, its ease of use, and shallow learning curve. These study results offer the modeling and simulation community important lessons learned and a realistic example of how to exploit the tablet’s multifunction user interface to further training simulation development efforts. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S330C EC-4 Avatars Crossing 1600 Turn-Based Gaming for Convoy Commander Training (15036) 1630 An Immersive Live / Virtual Bridge Approach with Ultra Wideband Tracking Technology: Phase II (15024) 1700 Virtualizing Humans for Game Ready Avatars (15023) Notes 32 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TURN-BASED GAMING FOR CONVOY COMMANDER TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15036 Rudy Boonekamp, Tijmen Muller Jur de Vrijer TNO SIMCEN, Royal Netherlands Army Soesterberg, The Netherlands Amersfoort, The Netherlands With the increasing complexity of current-day military operations, effective education and training of military commanders is of vital importance. Commanders need to perform within a broader range of conflicts; unpredictable threats and civil-military interaction place a great demand on their decision making skills. Because defense is transitioning towards a leaner organization, efficient and innovative tools are needed to provide better training value. The possibility to train frequently and learn from experience is indispensable. The Royal Netherlands Army sees potential in the use of serious games to meet these demands. This paper presents the results of a research project that explores the use of ‘turn-based gaming’ for training convoy commanders. In a turnbased serious game, a scenario is played in rounds which have a distinct planning and execution phase, making it possible to control time compression and time pressure. The advantages of this concept are that 1) the trainee can gain experience controlling a large number of units; 2) less experienced trainees can focus on tactical decision making as the complicating real-time factor is removed; and 3) trainees can plan and reflect on tactical decisions while staying immersed in the game. A prototype game was developed using VBS2, implementing the functionality and user interface for a turn-based convoy scenario. In a pilot session, seven logistics trainees played through three scenarios of increasing difficulty. The potential advantages of turn-based gaming were assessed using a questionnaire. The results indicate that the participants gain relevant experience, insight in effective communication and that turnbased gaming helps them learn by experience through fast loops of planning, execution and reflection. However, technical limitations and the limited scope of the experiment keep us from final judgment whether turn-based mechanics help trainees stay immersed in the game. AN IMMERSIVE LIVE / VIRTUAL BRIDGE APPROACH WITH ULTRA WIDEBAND TRACKING TECHNOLOGY: PHASE II 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15024 Jay Saffold, Tovar Shoaf & Jason Holutiak Research Network, Inc Kennesaw, GA Pat Garrity & Timothy Roberts U.S. Army Research Laboratory-Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL-HRED STTC) Orlando, FL The U.S. Army Research Laboratory-Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL-HRED STTC) performs research and development in the field of live/virtual and immersive technology with real-time Ultra-WideBand (UWB) tracking technology. This technical challenge has been thoroughly researched for many years and recently UWB technologies have become more mature. The basis of these studies is that live soldiers must be accurately located while virtual soldiers must stay immersed all within a common real environment. A novel integrated system approach previously developed has been updated to take better advantage of new UWB tracking systems, inertial measurement units, and global positioning system sensors. These redundant tracking sensors with uncorrelated error sources have been intelligently fused in real-time and combined with existing inverse kinematic technologies related to immersive systems developed by STTC, to provide a fast update rate tracking solution with full body articulation. The UWB component has also been optimized to allow for faster update rates and more intelligent responder choosing algorithms with transitioning between responder zones in the physical area; with the benefit of reducing the total UWB infrastructure requirements. This paper discusses extending these ongoing efforts to a more simplified system design and initial experimentation to demonstrate an improved soldier tracking and telemetry system which offers seamless indoor/outdoor tracking capabilities for live/virtual bridging with sufficient accuracy for high fidelity demonstration at the STTC facility, Military Operations for Urban Terrain, and other physical locations applicable for dismount training. The solution to real-time 3D location with high accuracy (< 1 ft) suitable for augmented reality over operational environments requires redundant systems with equivalent accuracy (when available), uncorrelated error sources to provide at least one tracking modality in denied conditions, and a high update rate for real-time systems. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 33 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts VIRTUALIZING HUMANS FOR GAME READY AVATARS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15023 Jay Saffold, Tovar Shoaf & Jason Holutiak Research Network, Inc Kennesaw, GA Timothy Roberts & Pat Garrity U.S. Army Research Laboratory-Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL-HRED STTC) Orlando, FL The U.S. Army Research Laboratory-Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL-HRED STTC) performs research and development in the field of creating realistic, individualized virtual avatars from live subjects that retain the physical characteristics and appearance of the subject including height, weight, skeletal dimensions, body morphology and facial/body appearance. While photogrammetric extraction technologies are maturing there are a number of additional steps which must be performed to “virtualize” live humans into game ready avatars. Game ready in this context means the mesh stretches properly with motion, there are sufficient level-of-detail options, and the number of polygons is optimized for computer rendering in real-time on commercial graphics adapters and central processing units. Photogrammetric algorithms which extract mesh information from 3D subjects also do not inherently include the underlying bone structure (rigging) required for avatars to move in virtual environments. A novel integrated system approach developed leverages low-cost data capture systems and targets automation of all the steps necessary to go from live human to a high-fidelity game-ready avatar. This paper discusses the different trade spaces associated with various photogrammetric techniques/algorithms, commercial software packages, data capture approaches, subject lighting, frame occupancy, motion during data collection impacts, and converting what is originally a very dense mesh through “retopologization” into optimized levels-of-detail which are properly weighted to a virtual bone system. Each step in the process is discussed along with approaches for automation and the associated trade spaces which affect the quality of the outcome. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-5 Fidelity Matters 0830 Reliably Assessing the Effectiveness of a Plan with Models of Verying Fidelity and Under Time Constraints (15060) 0900 Requirements for Future SAFs: Beyond Tactical Realism (15193) 0930 Required Fidelity of simulated Wound at the Point of Injury (15351) Notes 34 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts RELIABLY ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A PLAN USING MODELS OF VARYING FIDELITY AND UNDER TIME CONSTRAINTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15060 Steven de Jong, Wouter Noordkamp, Nick van der Poel, Selmar Smit TNO Defence, Safety & Security, The Netherlands Assessing the effectiveness of a plan, given multiple potential scenarios, is a common problem for analysts, espe-cially in the military domain. This problem can seriously impact the safety of the people that are involved in planned missions. More precisely, the availability of multiple models, with varying levels of fidelity, leads to the complex task of selecting the best model(s) to assess the effectiveness of a plan. Under time constraints, optimal model selec-tion depends not only on the fidelity of the models at hand, but also on the nature of the possible scenarios the plan applies to, such as the potential presence of stochastic variables and the number of different scenarios that have to be evaluated in order to obtain a reliable estimate of the true effectiveness of the plan. In this paper, two algorithms are presented to maximize the reliability of the obtained plan effectiveness under time constraints. To this end, the algorithms select the best model(s) as well as the most appropriate scenarios. Both algorithms have been tested on syn-thetic data as well as on two Navy-related use cases. Results show that both algorithms reach a higher level of relia-bility within the given amount of time than conventional approaches. Thus, they allow analysts to better assess the effectiveness of their plans and therefore they increase the safety of everyone involved in planned missions. REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE SAFS: BEYOND TACTICAL REALISM 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15193 Robert E. Wray, PhD Soar Technology, Inc. NAWC TSD Ann Arbor, MI Heather A. Priest, Melissa M. Walwanis, & Katherine Kaste NAWC TSD Orlando, FL A key component of realistic and effective training in simulation is the behavior of semi-automated forces (SAFs). SAFs provide opponents, friendly forces, and other dynamic entities within the simulation. In most cases today, SAFs are designed and implemented to be tactically realistic; that is, they take actions that carry out good tactical decisions. As a result, SAFs are typically evaluated in terms of the realism or “fidelity” of their actions to the tactical situation and not with regard to training effectiveness. We contend SAF tactical realism is a necessary but incomplete requirement for cost-effective and trainingeffective deployment of SAFs for simulation-based training. SAF behavior should also be modulated by scenario/exercise goals and also by the learning needs of individual trainees. In practice, these additional requirements tend to surface during delivery of training, requiring human instructor/operator teams to intervene. Interventions both increase the cost of simulation-based training and potentially lower the aggregate effectiveness of that training: delivering an appropriate experience at an apt time to the trainee is contingent on the attention and action of the instructional team. Further, as SAFs are increasingly used in mixed live-virtual-constructive training situations, SAFs that consider only tactical decisions will further limit scalability and increase the operational cost of LVC training. In response, we suggest that imbuing the training system with the capability to understand and support scenario goals and individual training needs can make SAFs more practical for everyday training. We present examples of adaptation and variation that may be important for training but that are not typically embedded in a tactical SAF. We discuss the implications of these missed requirements and outline suggestions for incorporating interpretations of learning context in future simulation systems based on experience researching and developing such a capability. Finally, we outline methods for verifying and validating SAFs designed to meet these additional requirements. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 35 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts REQUIRED FIDELITY OF SIMULATED WOUNDS AT THE POINT OF INJURY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15351 M. Beth H. Pettitt Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate Simulation and Training Technology Center Orlando, Florida At the point of injury, critical medical tasks include finding and identifying the injury as well as applying the appropriate initial care. A considerable amount of research and development has already occurred to increase the fidelity of simulated wounds for training, primarily at the point of injury. As material and moulage techniques mature, and as more relevant data is collected on tissue properties, it is worth examining what fidelity is really required for training at the point of injury. This effort will explore the current state of wound simulation and propose a basic test methodology to assess what fidelity is adequate. Secondly, this effort will analyze the differences in technology effectiveness of two and three dimensional (2D and 3D) wound moulage. Other factors that will be examined including cost comparisons between the average 2D wound and silicon-based 3D wound, as well as the time to apply each type of moulage. Finally, conclusions will be discussed on the training effectiveness of the two types of moulage and recommendations will be made on the appropriate use of each in medical training. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F EC-6 It’s All About Veterans 0830 Virtual Interview Training Increases Job Offers for Veterans and Others (15013) 0900 Stepping Stones – An Augmented Reality Rehabilitation Game (15181) 0930 The VA Virtual Medical Center: Implementing a Vision for a Virtual Healthcare Campus for our Veterans (15358) Notes 36 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts VIRTUAL INTERVIEW TRAINING INCREASES JOB OFFERS FOR VETERANS AND OTHERS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15013 Dale E. Olsen, PhD & Laura B. Humm, BS SIMmersion Columbia, Maryland Matthew J. Smith, PhD, LCSW,MPE; Michael Fleming, MD, MPH & Neil Jorden, PhD Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Chicago, Illinois Morris D. Bell, Ph.D., ABPP Yale School of Medicine, Dept. of Psychiatry It is difficult for Veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and others with disabilities to enter the workforce, resulting in a low employment rate. The job interview presents a critical barrier for obtaining employment. To improve job interview skills and the employment prospects of people with disabilities, we developed Molly, a virtual human resource manager. The simulation provides repeated job interview practice with extensive feedback and accommodates a variety of special needs. This paper will focus on the methodology and steps used to develop the simulation, and then report on four single-blind controlled studies and four field validations of the training solution. During each virtual interview, Molly asks trainees questions about their skills and experiences. Using information provided on a job application, she randomly selects questions tailored to the trainee’s needs from a database of 1,200 options. The trainees practice until they master the skills at three difficulty levels. The four studies included veterans with PTSD (n=33), people with mood disorders (n=37), people on the autism spectrum (n=26), and people with Schizophrenia (n=32). Those who used the simulation (treatment) demonstrated significantly greater improvement than the control group during live role-play interviews showing efficacy. They were also more confident in their interview abilities. Separate follow-up studies surveyed people from these study groups after six months. For each follow-up study, people from the PTSD and the Mood Disorder Cohorts were combined. The data analysis used logistic regression to adjust for known covariates and to estimate the odds of receiving a job offer. For each study group the estimated odds of receiving a job offer were about 8-9 times greater for the treatment group than the control group. STEPPING STONES – AN AUGMENTED REALITY REHABILITATION GAME 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15181 Stuart Armstrong QinetiQ Inc. Orlando, Florida Gait disabilities are highly prevalent in veteran populations and include a wide range of symptoms, often caused by trauma or disease. Recent experimental techniques suggests that rapid advancement of Augmented Reality (AR) and hybrid virtual reality (VR) technologies have the potential for simulation of sensorimotor training in gait rehabilitation. This paper describes the development of a game based AR system to support the rehabilitation of lower limb amputees. The AR system was built was designed to be a standalone wearable system that can be used outside of a clinical setting. Initial trials were held at the Providence Veteran Administration Medical Centers Gait and Motion Analysis Laboratory and the AR system was identified as a novel tool that can be used for gait rehabilitation in the clinic and the home. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 37 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THE VA VIRTUAL MEDICAL CENTER: IMPLEMENTING A VISION FOR A VIRTUAL HEALTHCARE CAMPUS FOR OUR VETERANS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15358 Rosalyn P. Scott, Brian V. Burke, Cathy D. Nancy Benton Jennie Gallimore Graham & Terry L. Oroszi Veterans Health Wright State University Veterans Health Administration Administration Dayton, OH Dayton, OH Spokane, WA Helga Carabello Mary E. Davidson Paul T. Sean C. McCoy Manny Veterans Health Veterans Health Ingmundson Veterans Health Dominguez Administration Administration Veterans Health Administration Veterans Health Portland, OR Cleveland, OH Administration Gainesville, FL Administration San Antonio, TX Orlando, FL The Veterans Health Administration is the largest integrated health system in the world serving Veterans in both urban and rural environments. To enhance clinical outcomes and education, a VA Virtual Medical Center (VMC) has been launched as a collaborative care and learning environment. Resources can be accessed anytime and anywhere. Capabilities include virtual clinics with the integration of current telehealth technologies, cybraries for patients and healthcare team members with electronic resources and searchable medical content, serious medical games, e-learning platforms and conference venues. A full range of learning technologies, including virtual patient and standardized patient-based platforms are fully integrated into the environment. Our implementation strategy leverages ways in which the VMC can be synergistic with existing care models; decrease repetitive staff activities; increase dissemination of and participation in educational interventions; provide more effective education; capture productivity measures; and, be easy to navigate. Input from human factors engineers, clinicians, educators, and technology experts has been critical. Initial implementation includes five pilot projects characterized by the need for educational interventions for patients or/and healthcare team members as well as clinical interventions to optimize Veteran health outcomes in key clinical areas. The clinical areas include diabetes, sleep disturbances, congestive heart failure management, obesity, and palliative care. Interventions include staff training for new protocols, peer and professional coaching for patients with chronic diseases, shared medical appointments, training and resources for uisng at home equipment such as CPAP machines. Assessment strategies are comprised of a global assessment of the technologies in place and project specific ones tracking outcomes. Our newest generation of Veterans is very tech savvy and embraces virtual world technologies. The VMC will allow geographically separated staff and patients to interact in a rich avatarbased environment. In-world opportunities can provide important care resources and rich educational experiences for all learners. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-7 Let’s Get Physiological 1030 Visualizing fMRI Data Using Volume Rendering in Virtual Reality (15253) 1100 Professional Soldier Assessment of a Rifle-Mounted Target Hand-Off System (15039) 1130 Empirical Support for Brain-Based Assessment in Simulation-Based Training (15300) Notes 38 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts VISUALIZING FMRI DATA USING VOLUME RENDERING IN VIRTUAL REALITY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15253 Joseph Holub, Eliot Winer Iowa State University Ames, Iowa Medical imaging technology has changed patient diagnosis since the first x-ray in 1895 (Rontgen, 1896). Powerful imaging technologies like Computed Tomography (CT), Ultrasound, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) are now used daily. One study showed preoperative imaging for potential appendicitis reduced unnecessary surgeries by 87% (Raman et al., 2008). With the 2015 Defense Budget including $47.4 billion for the Military Health System (Overview United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/ Chief Financial Officer, 2014), enhanced use of imaging for improved patient care and cost reduction is critical. More recently, functional MRI (fMRI) technology was developed to extend medical imaging beyond 3D static models to capture physiological changes over time. Currently, fMRI is used for applications from examining beating hearts to mapping brain activity in real-time. fMRI has the potential to dramatically change how illnesses are diagnosed, planned for, and treated. Methods created for visualizing fMRI data in the academic realm have rarely made their way into commercial software toolsets. For example, there are no software libraries available for researchers to create their own fMRI visualization tools. Another consideration needs to be the visual manner (i.e., 2D, 3D, or 3D stereo) in which these visual representations are created. Previous research on visualizing medical data has demonstrated improved understanding of spatial relationships when using stereoscopic 3D over traditional 2D representations. This indicates that virtual reality may be a superior medium for visualizing fMRIs. This paper presents research to: 1) make readily available fMRI software libraries and 2) use these libraries to visualize fMRI data in immersive VR. The method was tested on a desktop computer as well as a large multi-walled VR system running off a cluster of computers. Preliminary results have indicated that visualizing fMRI data in VR can be done in a computationally efficient manner. Multiple fMRI datasets were used for evaluation by measuring load times and frame rates. PROFESSIONAL SOLDIER ASSESSMENT OF A RIFLE-MOUNTED TARGET HAND-OFF SYSTEM 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15039 Jerome Levesque, Katherine Banko Defence Research & Development Canada Ottawa, Canada Olaf Binsch Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research Soesterberg, The Netherlands The miniaturization of digital image acquisition and processing hardware, positional sensors, and batteries has enabled the creation of assisted targeting systems light enough to be integrated onto small firearms to increase the probability of soldiers detecting and hitting targets. As well, the technology allows soldiers to share target locations, thereby increasing tactical situational awareness and enabling target prioritization and target hand-off. We investigated how these new technologies might impact operational effectiveness by testing the concepts using human-in-the-loop simulation in a virtual environment. Two conditions examined the tool usage (no target hand-off vs. target hand-off). Within these conditions we added patrol and attack variants (no enemy, inaccurate enemy and accurate enemy). Each condition was repeated 8 times for a total of 64 randomized trials. Combat effectiveness measures quantifying blue casualties and the disruption of enemy activity were augmented with physiological indicants of stress and self-report measures of self-efficacy, performance and cognitive load. Null hypothesis significance testing applied to the combat effectiveness measures did not detect any statistically significant improvement in the combat effectiveness of the section as a result of using the target hand-off system. A Bayesian analysis was conducted to determine the probable size of an undetected effect. The human factor measures indicated differences between the simulated high and low threat conditions. Self-report measures combined with physiological measures did not reveal increases in stress when high and low levels of threat were compared. While participants evaluated the target hand-off system positively, the ability of the new technology to decrease cognitive load and therefore increase combat effectiveness measures remains unconfirmed. Simulations have limitations, particularly when exploring the benefits of target hand-off functionality (i.e. weapons effects and risks encountered in combat cannot be fully represented for safety and ethical reasons). And, combat stress is difficult to produce in an experimental setting. However, despite the small number of participants (n = 8), it was possible to estimate the probability distribution for the actual effect size. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 39 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts EMPIRICAL SUPPORT FOR BRAIN-BASED ASSESSMENT IN SIMULATION-BASED TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15300 Kevin B. Oden, Ph.D., Kelley L. Phillips Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training Orlando, FL Kurtulus Izzetoglu, Ph.D., Patrick Craven, Ph.D., Hasan Ayaz, Ph.D., Gabriela Hernandez Drexel University Philadelphia, PA Individualized training solutions are increasingly important to military training programs. To effectively adapt training to each student requires valid and reliable measures of human performance. Historically, the military has relied on behavioral and subjective reporting methods to assess and evaluate human performance (e.g., speed, accuracy, reported workload); such measures are effective for simple, wellcontrolled tasks with a strong behavioral element, but they lack the diagnostic sensitivity required to measure meaningful differences in individuals’ performance on complex tasks that stress cognitive performance. Brain-based measures of functional brain activity in naturalistic settings may lead to improved understanding of a trainee’s progress. Specifically, functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS) is an optical brain imaging technology that can be used in the context of simulation-based training to measure changes in brain activity related to executive cognitive functions. Previous work describes how these changes could be used to measure the transition from novice to expert performance by accurately and reliably assessing the transition of cognitive skills out of working memory into automaticity. In this paper, the authors describe how brain-based metrics derived from fNIRS and task performance data were developed for a realistic pilot flying task in a simulation environment. Results from this study demonstrate that fNIRS can be used to quantify meaningful differences as novice pilots learn to navigate a prescribed flight path. Behavioral performance data confirmed that navigational proficiency improved across trials, while the average oxygen concentrations declined in several areas of the prefrontal cortex, as hypothesized. Furthermore, there were statistically significant correlations between the neural and behavioral data., These results show that neurological data may provide a powerful complement to existing behavioral measures by allowing instructor pilots not only to observe trainee outward behavior, but also to gain a perspective of neurological changes occurring in the brain itself. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-8 Experience with the Experience API 1600 Putting Live Firing Range Data to Work Using the xAPI (15019) 1630 Adapting Gunnery Training Using the Experience API (15179) 1700 Opening Legacy Data Silos: Using Experience Data for Educational Impact (15043) Notes 40 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts PUTTING LIVE FIRING RANGE DATA TO WORK USING THE XAPI 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15019 Paula J. Durlach Army Research Laboratory Orlando, FL Nick Washburn Riptide Software, Inc. Oviedo, FL Damon Regan The Tolliver Group, Inc. Inc. Orlando, FL The past decade has seen advances in instrumentation of live training ranges. For example, when combined, the Location of Hit and Miss (LOMAH) system and the Targetry Range Automated Control and Recording (TRACR) system send virtually immediate feedback on marksmanship performance to trainers, via a tablet computer. However, despite digital availability, the performance data are not used for individual feedback, analyzed, nor automatically shared with any other training management or readiness systems. A proof-ofprinciple prototype system was developed, which demonstrated how the use of the Experience Application Programming Interface (xAPI) could be used to collect valuable training data and support (1) individual feedback, (2) aggregated data views for trainers and range operations personnel, (3) flexible data views for training researchers, and (4) automated availability of qualification data to the Army Training Management System. The xAPI was developed to allow the collection of learner data from different types of learning experiences, and to make the data available to other applications. The LOMAH-TRACR data were converted to xAPI statements, which were sent via an encrypted wireless network to a Learning Record Store (LRS). Using a pin number, individual trainees could access a visualization of their own data on a mobile device, and be given a link to learning content, personalized by the software’s analysis of their individual shot group pattern; however, no actual Soldier testing occurred as part of the project. Trainers and range operations personnel could also view data, and filter it according to their needs. An unanticipated benefit was the ability of range personnel to identify operational defects in LOMAH targets. A third “researcher” dashboard was created to allow for analysts to select data and export for further analysis. A future benefit will be the ability to integrate data from simulation and live training, in order to determine the most efficient and cost-effective combination to achieve desired levels of performance. ADAPTING GUNNERY TRAINING USING THE EXPERIENCE API 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15179 Rodney Long United States Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate Simulation and Training Technology Center, Orlando, FL Michael Hruska Ashley Medford Problem Solutions Johnstown, PA Jennifer Murphy, Carolyn Newton Quantum Improvements Consulting Orlando, FL Tara Kilcullen, Robert L. Harvey Jr Raydon Corporation Port Orange, FL The Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) has described plans for modernizing Army training in documents such as the Army Learning Model (ALM, TRADOC PAM 525-8-2). The ALM calls for increasing the personalization of the soldier learning process so that training is tailored to the individual soldier throughout his/her career. To accomplish this goal, a persistent representation of soldier performance across a variety of technology-based training systems is required. Currently, performance data throughout the live, virtual, constructive, and gaming (LVCG) spectrum is not maintained, nor is it used to adapt future training for soldiers or their units. However, advances in data interoperability have recently made development of complex student models using this performance data a possibility. The Experience API (xAPI) is one such innovation. As part of our research, we have used the xAPI to capture interoperable performance data for unstabilized gunnery simulators. Using this performance data, we have developed an adaptive training curriculum in which crew training is adapted based on prior individual performance on a gunnery simulator. This paper describes the development of interoperable performance data for unstabilized gunnery simulators using the xAPI specification as well as the findings of an experiment to demonstrate gains in learning and training efficiency. The results can be used to inform the Army in its training modernization goals, as well as the simulation-based training community as a whole. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 41 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts OPENING LEGACY DATA SILOS: USING EXPERIENCE DATA FOR EDUCATIONAL IMPACT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15043 Jonathan Poltrack ADL Initiative Contractor with Problem Solutions Alexandria, VA Tom Creighton ADL Initiative Contractor with Aquate Corp Alexandria, VA The Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM) afforded major benefits to the learning and training industry by creating an environment of interoperability for e-learning content and systems. However, the data that resulted from a learner experiencing SCORM content was often stored in proprietary data stores. As a result, potentially important data was locked away and unable to be used. Recently, emerging trends in big data, predictive analytics and data visualization renewed interest in accessing massive amounts of learning experience data. Paradata and correlations can be evaluated to provide learner recommendations for relevant content, to present visualizations to teachers so they can see how their content is being used, and to view meaningful analytics that among other things, can be used to refine and improve learning content. But how can this be accomplished when the requisite data is locked in proprietary learning management systems? This paper will discuss a novel method of intercepting SCORM communications and translating to standard Experience API (xAPI) ‘statements’. The xAPI is an emerging technology that allows tracking of experiential data and provides secure access to data once stored. After applying this solution, SCORM run-time data is stored in a learning record store (LRS) allowing secure access for analysis and visualization. It is possible to apply this solution in two distinct ways: content or server-side updates. Both of these are viable, and in some cases almost automatable solutions to exposing vast amounts of SCORM data. This paper will explore both methods for removing legacy data silos, will discuss the pros and cons of both content and server side updates, will report on the feasibility of these methods by describing software proofs-ofconcept, and will illustrate several use cases and examples of the value of leveraging SCORM e-learning data once it is available en masse. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-9 3D Psycho 0830 Rapid 3D Geospatially Oriented Structure Extraction from Minimal Image Sets (15323) 0900 Extending Intelligent Tutoring Beyond the Desktop to the Psychomotor Domain (15029) 0930 Delivering 3D Virtual Maintenance Training Content: Examining the Deployment Options (15239) Notes 42 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts RAPID 3D GEOSPATIALLY ORIENTED STRUCTURE EXTRACTION FROM MINIMAL IMAGE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15323 R. Scott Starsman, PhD Avineon, Inc. Director, Defense Systems McLean, VA Traditional approaches to 3D scene reconstruction require very large image sets, are extremely processor intensive, and perform poorly when faced with surfaces with limited features. The work described in this paper builds upon an approach presented at I/ITSEC 2013 that greatly increases quality of 3D reconstruction, requires a minimal set of images, reduces model storage size, and is resilient in the face of low-feature surfaces. While the work presented in 2013 demonstrated the successful reconstruction of a 3D model from a small set of images, it suffered from several problems including long processing time, low success rate for arbitrary structures (meaning that it worked well on specific types of buildings/structures but not on the vast majority), sensitivity to misidentification of commonly present elements, such as logos and signs, and correspondence point noise. This paper details the methods used to address these deficiencies and achieve the full promise of rapid scene reconstruction in the face of a limited number of images. Two elements of the image processing pipeline were identified that led to the performance issues and replacement algorithms and processes were developed and integrated into the model. The replacement of those components dramatically improved performance and supported the generation of arbitrary structures from an image set. Key issues that have been resolved include: extremely long processing times, sensitivity to structures with few surface features, sensitivity to repeated features, and sensitivity to correspondence point noise. A description and derivation of these new approaches is discussed and as a final demonstration, the system is used to generate a 3D reconstruction of a city block with the results capable of being viewed in a tool such as Google Earth. This work is pertinent in the military, security, simulation, and disaster response scenarios. EXTENDING INTELLIGENT TUTORING BEYOND THE DESKTOP TO THE PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15029 Robert A. Sottilare, Ph.D. US Army Research Laboratory Orlando, Florida Joseph LaViola, Ph.D University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Today, Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) are generally authored to support desktop training applications with the most common domains involving cognitive problem solving tasks (e.g., mathematics and physics). In recent years, implementations of game-based tutors based on the Generalized Intelligent Framework for Tutoring (GIFT), an opensource tutoring architecture, provided tailored, militarily-relevant training experiences in desktop applications (e.g., Virtual Battlespace and Virtual Medic). However, these game-based desktop tutors have been limited to adaptive training for cognitive tasks (e.g., problem solving and decision-making), whereas the military requires adaptive training to extend beyond the desktop to be compatible with the physical nature of many tasks performed by soldiers. This paper examines how commercial smart glass technologies could be adapted to support tailored, computer-guided instruction in the psychomotor domain for military training in-the-wild, locations where no formal training infrastructure is present. We evaluated the usability and system features of 10 commercial smart glasses including Atheer One, CastAR, Epson Moverio BT-200, GlassUp, Google Glass, LaForge Icis, Laster See-Through, Meta Space Glasses, Optinvent ORA-S, and Vuzix M-100. Smart glasses were selected as the focus of this study over handheld mobile devices to promote a hands-free experience during a training task where the hands are needed to accomplish the task (e.g., climbing and maneuvering over uneven terrain). Each set of smart glasses was evaluated not with respect to each other, but with respect to their capabilities to support adaptive instruction in-the-wild and at the learner’s point-of-need. We examined a wide range of smart glass features and capabilities, and evaluated their compatibility with a representative military task, land navigation, to answer the question: what system design features (e.g., usability and interaction) are needed to support adaptive training for this individual psychomotor task beyond desktop applications so it can be taught anywhere (in-the-wild)? Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 43 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts DELIVERING 3D VIRTUAL MAINTENANCE TRAINING CONTENT: EXAMINING THE DEPLOYMENT OPTIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15239 Christopher Van Duyne, Scott Ariotti The DiSTI Corporation Orlando, FL Over the past several years, the U.S. Armed Forces have been significantly expanding their adoption of virtualized solutions for use in maintenance training applications. This growing adoption is coupled with a growing interest in expanding the ways in which these training materials are consumed. Unlike traditional operational trainers that teach students on fixed hardware, the virtualized training material for maintainers lends itself well to providing innovative training beyond typical brick and mortar schoolhouses; so long as the content can be effectively delivered. These graphically intense 3D virtual environments often levy hefty requirements on the type of computer capable of delivering an immersive interactive 3D experience. This paper focuses on the latest options available for delivering these virtual environments to the training consumer along with the pros and cons of each option and key lessons learned for two different types of training consumers; Classroom users and External users. The deployment options in this paper compare and contrast traditional desktop use with technologies that incorporate mobile client applications, fixed server rendering solutions, and newly emerging cloud-based application rendering services. The review includes relative cost comparisons, barriers to entry, the consumer access experience, application development considerations, and necessary hardware utilizing real-world examples that encompass both military aircraft and commercial automotive training devices. The paper also introduces discussion topics on information assurance and security considerations for each deployment option. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-10 To Game or Not To Game 1030 Gamers Today, Surgeons Tomorrow? (15235) 1100 Relationship Between Learner and Environment: Learner Traits in Serious Games (15092) 1130 Learning Stories: Design Considerations for Narrative Elements in Serious Games (15303) Notes 44 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts GAMERS TODAY, SURGEONS TOMORROW? 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15235 Alyssa Tanaka, M.S., Courtney Graddy, M.S. & Roger Smith, Ph.D. Florida Hospital Nicholson Center Celebration, FL Manuela Perez, M.D., Ph.D Nancy University Hospital Nancy, FR Faced with an age of reliance on technology and innovative advances, surgeons are using cutting-edge robotic systems to perform complex procedures and virtual reality simulators for specialized skill training. The virtual environment and controllers in surgical simulators are reminiscent of those in videogames. So, can playing video games develop skills similar to those used in robotic surgery? This paper compares the performance of video gamers, medical students, and “lay people” to expert robotic surgeons on a robotic surgery simulator. Participants recruited from the UCF College of Medicine, UCF FIEA, and Florida Hospital completed a demographic questionnaire. The subjects then performed three computer-based perceptual tests and participated in two warm-up tasks on the Mimic dV-Trainer to familiarize themselves with the system. The experiment then measured their performance over eight trials of two core simulated exercises. After completing these trials, participants completed a post-questionnaire about their experience. Analysis of the data did not verify differences between the groups for the perceptual tests except for the time to complete scores in the Flanker and subsidizing tasks, in which expert surgeons took significantly longer than other groups. Significant differences were found between the groups for the first and eighth trials of the simulated exercises, with surgeons performing better than other groups. All groups improved significantly from trial one to trial eight, with surgeons performing better than all groups. Gaming console type positively correlated with Overall Score in the Ring & Rail exercise, as well as Time and Economy of Motion in the suturing exercise. No other correlations were found. The results are in contrast with prior literature on video game experience in laparoscopic surgery, suggesting that gaming abilities do not translate to all surgical modalities. Future research is necessary to further examine the impact alternative skillsets may have on surgical skills. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN LEARNER AND ENVIRONMENT: LEARNER TRAITS IN SERIOUS GAMES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15092 Marvin G. Fuller, Ph.D. Oglethorpe Charter School Savannah, Georgia Dennis Beck, Ph.D. University of Arkansas Fayetteville , Arkansas When investigating learning, it is commonly discussed that there is a strong relationship between learning and the interactions between the learner, environment, and content. It is important to understand these relationships regarding serious games because they may provide many learning and training advantages, including maximizing the efficiency of achievement of learning targets. Despite the recognized potential of serious games, few researchers have explored the relationships between specific patterns of behaviors and types of game-based learning environments. This paper presents a practical underlying theory that relates how patterns of learner characteristics and behavior can be used to improve serious game design and promote learning effectiveness. It also presents research results showing relationships between the learner and engagement in serious game environments. The case study used for this research involved high school and college-level math students using a commercial 3D adventure-quest math game. The data and statistically significant results of the study show the relationship between gamer behavior, gender, and age-band, to time-on-task and learning performance. Important conclusions presented at the end of this paper include a range of principles useful for serious game designers, developers, and educators. Recommendations for future research provided at the end of the paper will provoke interest in furthering basic principles for learner engagement across a broad range of serious game applications. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 45 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts LEARNING STORIES: DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR NARRATIVE ELEMENTS IN SERIOUS GAMES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15303 Michael W. Freeman, EdD MW Freeman Solutions Fayetteville, NC Mark Friedman Adayana Inc Suffolk, VA Serious games are powerful tools for providing direct experience and concrete contexts in military training environments. They depend on stories, or narratives, to provide the basis for effective, engaging learning experiences. However, there are few research-based guidelines to support design of learning narratives or account for why they include specific characters, environments, or activities. While the fundamentals of good instructional design and learning are enduring, narratives for serious games require careful design to leverage the great promise and inherent power of the serious game. This paper proposes an inclusive model for understanding and designing serious game narrative. The paper starts with a working definition of serious game narrative and continues with a distillation of a review of the literature to propose the components that make up an effective narrative for serious games. The paper continues by proposing specific design considerations based on a review of learning theories and best practices for each of these components. This is intended to recommend to serious game designers and developers a common lexicon of terms to describe narrative and to enable a purposeful process for designing the game narrative and experience. The paper concludes with recommendations for implementation and future study. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A EC-11 Droning On 1330 Procedural Reconstruction of Simulation Terrain Using Drones (15041) 1415 Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Platform Performance Using Modeling and Simulation (15006) Notes 46 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts PROCEDURAL RECONSTRUCTION OF SIMULATION TERRAIN USING DRONES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15041 Ryan McAlinden, Evan Suma, Timofey Grechkin USC Institute for Creative Technologies Los Angeles California Michael Enloe National Simulation Center Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas Photogrammetric techniques for constructing 3D virtual environments have previously been plagued by expensive equipment, imprecise and visually unappealing results. However, with the introduction of lowcost, off-the-shelf (OTS) unmanned aerial systems (UAS), lighter and capable cameras, and more efficient software techniques for reconstruction, the modeling and simulation (M&S) community now has available to it new types of virtual assets that are suited for modern-day games and simulations. This paper presents an approach for fully autonomously collecting, processing, storing and rendering highly-detailed geospecific terrain data using these OTS techniques and methods. We detail the types of equipment used, the flight parameters, the processing and reconstruction pipeline, and finally the results of using the dataset in a game/simulation engine. A key objective of the research is procedurally segmenting the terrain into usable features that the engine can interpret – i.e. distinguishing between roads, buildings, vegetation, etc. This allows the simulation core to assign attributes related to physics, lighting, collision cylinders and navigation meshes that not only support basic rendering of the model but introduce interaction with it. The results of this research are framed in the context of a new paradigm for geospatial collection, analysis and simulation. Specifically, the next generation of M&S systems will need to integrate environmental representations that have higher detail and richer metadata while ensuring a balance between performance and usability. ASSESSMENT OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT PLATFORM PERFORMANCE USING MODELING AND SIMULATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15006 Brent Terwilliger, Dennis Vincenzi, David Ison, and Todd Smith Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Worldwide Campus Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) can provide significant enhancement to capability, when used in a manner best aligning inherent design characteristics to requirements of a given application. However, wide variability in designs, configurations, and operational attributes requires the performance of thorough investigation to appropriately identify suitable platforms. Failure to perform sufficient examination can lead to expensive cost overruns, diminished capability, and degraded safety. Assessing the capabilities and performance associated with categorized UAS platforms through experimentation and analysis can produce valuable insight regarding propriety for application. The use of modeling and simulation (M&S) provides the means to identify limitations, benefits, and considerations necessary to aptly employ UAS. Understanding how to best select, configure, and apply this rapidly advancing technology is anticipated to support increased innovation, safety, efficiency, and effectiveness; elements essential to achieving successful integration into the National Airspace System (NAS) for use across government, industry, and academia. This paper contains a description of continued work from an experimental research project featuring use of M&S to identify, observe, and investigate critical factors of UAS platform application in an efficient and expedient manner. Operational design attributes (i.e., published and derived metrics) of 282 commercially-off-the-shelf (COTS) platform configurations were identified, classified, and analyzed to create category representative UAS performance models. These models were employed in 30 experimental trials and subsequent statistical analysis. The results led to the development of a theory of operation, selection requirements for use of UAS in aircraft rescue and fire fighting (ARFF), and an expanded series of UAS category performance models. Future anticipated research, including improvement of performance models, expanded simulation trials, and further refinements will also be discussed. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 47 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C EC-12 A Little Design Will Do Ya 1330 Early Synthetic Prototyping: When We Build It, Will They Come? (15187) 1400 Implementation of Agile Methods within Instructional Systems Design: A Case Study (15094) 1430 Development and Evaluation of a Venipuncture and Phlebotomy Training System (15084) Notes EARLY SYNTHETIC PROTOTYPING: WHEN WE BUILD IT, WILL THEY COME? 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15187 LTC Brian Vogt U.S. Army, Army Capabilities Integration Center Fort Eustis, VA Mr. Michael Megiveron & Dr. Robert E Smith U.S. Army, TARDEC Warren, MI One of the challenges facing the Army today is the ability to explore innovative concepts and capabilities in a resource constrained environment to develop materiel, doctrinal, and organizational solutions for the future force. Early Synthetic Prototyping (ESP) is a process and a set of tools that will enable Soldiers and technologists to rapidly assess how technologies might be employed within a game environment. ESP is envisioned to be a persistent game network that allows Soldiers to play scenarios and provide experiential feedback to concept and capability developers. An operational test has been conducted that leveraged VBS3 to explore four future concepts: Virtual Pointer, Counter Unmanned Aerial System, Aerial Resupply, and the Next Generation Close Combat Vehicle A total of 76 Soldiers participated in the test. The test allowed the prototyping of ESP tools and processes, along with answering three primary questions: (1) What games do Soldiers play in their off-duty time and what devices do they use? (2) What would motivate Soldiers to participate in ESP on their own time? (3) How valuable is their qualitative feedback and game data to concept and capability developers? The results of this test were encouraging and overwhelmingly positive. More than 85% of Soldiers play military-themed games in their off duty hours; more than half of the Soldiers play more than 10 hours of military-themed games each week. Most Soldiers stated they would participate in ESP on their off duty hours and their biggest motivation to participate is knowing they are helping shape the future of their Army. The qualitative feedback indicates Soldiers are able to provide insightful feedback about materiel, organizational, and doctrinal solutions. The results of this study show there is strong potential that ESP will not only be a great way for concept and capability developers to gain meaningful feedback from end users but is also an environment Soldiers relate with and can innovate solutions. This paper describes the test procedure, analysis of the results, lessons learned, and recommendations for future development. Insights are generalizable to understand how to engage service members in their off-duty hours through gaming solutions. The results of this test gained the attention and support of senior leaders in ARCIC and TARDEC. Continued research needs to refine the ESP method and to determine the best way to extract and visualize both qualitative and quantitative data from the composite data collected from thousands of Soldiers. 48 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts IMPLEMENTATION OF AGILE METHODS WITHIN INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS DESIGN: A CASE STUDY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15094 Lisa Cooney & Anne Little, PhD Addx Corporation Alexandria, VA Today’s economic environment of shrinking budgets demands training that aligns with the needs of the workforce by improving specific employee behaviors. When organizations identify a workforce deficiency there often are critical implications for their operations, so they typically respond with training solutions to correct the deficiency. During the fall of 2014, the authors were tasked with a course design and development effort for a two-week instructor-led program management course. The traditional instructional design methods used for previous versions of this course relied on a locked-down front-end design, classic linear processes, and evaluation methods that provided feedback late in the development cycle. The previous version of the course was heavily based on another Federal agency’s models and did not meet the needs of the students. Additionally, policies needed for inclusion in the class were in flux. The time available for development was tight; two full-time instructional designers and three part-time subject matter experts needed to create a 10-day instructor-led course in time to deliver a class offering in less than seven months. To create the new course, the development team incorporated the principles of Agile software development. This paper will review Agile software development, the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) instructional design method, and explain how the team applied the principles of Agile development to instructional systems design. We will discuss the implementation process, organizational tools, team dynamics, and customer involvement. Finally, we will illustrate the potential cost savings of this method by comparing a summary of the resources utilized to industry training development metrics. DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A VENIPUNCTURE AND PHLEBOTOMY TRAINING SYSTEM 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15084 Teresita M. Sotomayor, Ph.D. Angela M. Alban U.S. Army Research Laboratory HRED-STTC SIMETRI, Inc. Orlando, Florida Winter Park, Florida The U.S. Army has invested significantly in manikin technology to train procedural skills associated with military medical training in diverse simulated environments. Training equipment needs to be rugged and reliable to endure austere conditions but refined enough to provide training solutions with appropriate fidelity. A manikin or Part-Task Trainer (PTT) possessing those qualities that accurately trains venipuncture and injection procedures has historically been a challenge. The goal of the U.S. Army Medical Simulation Training Centers (MSTCs) is to provide Army personnel with more effective technology, tools, and techniques for training Army personnel. As a result, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate (ARL-HRED) Simulation and Training Technology Center (STTC) was sponsored by the U.S. Army Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) to develop a next-generation venipuncture and injection PTT, that is more realistic, durable, and cost effective to teach these lifesaving skills. The primary objective is to develop a proof of concept device that demonstrates the viability of the materials, the electrical/mechanical design, and the technical approach. The research focused on identifying innovative technologies, technical risks of the approach, costs, and benefits associated with development and demonstration of the prototype. Additionally, a usability study was conducted with first responders to gather feedback and assess whether the initial prototype met training requirements. This paper will discuss in detail how training requirements impacted the design of the training system and also explore the criteria used to develop the overall design, as well as the identification of specific capabilities. In addition, it will explain how subject matter expertise was utilized to develop requirements and performance metrics used to evaluate the feasibility of the concept. Finally, it will review results from usability evaluations and lessons learned from the development and implementation of this project. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 49 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-1 This Won’t Hurt a Bit 1400 Piloting a Groundbreaking Virtual Continuing Competency Platform: Results and Recommendations (15325) 1430 Mobile App Design for Veterans with Physical and Cognitive Limitations (15182) 1500 Structured Development of Interventions to Improved Physician Knowledge Retention (15095) Notes PILOTING A GROUNDBREAKING VIRTUAL CONTINUING COMPETENCY PLATFORM: RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15325 Jennifer McNamara BreakAway Games Hunt Valley, MD Paul Grace and Margaret Bent, Ph.D. OTR National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy Inc Gaithersburg, MD The National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy (NBCOT®), the national certification body for occupational therapy professionals in the United States, embarked upon a novel project to employ a virtual continuing competency platform. The genesis for the innovative virtual product was the result of a practice analysis study - the goal of which was to gain evidence-based direction for individualized programs of continuing professional development. The study identified six key areas for focus: providing client-centered care, working in interprofessional teams, employing evidence-based practice, applying quality improvement, utilizing informatics, and promoting professional responsibility. The virtual platform targets certificants’ needs related to maintaining knowledge for current practice as well as supporting career enhancement and growth. With neither an existing platform nor content to meet its needs, NBCOT took on the task of designing, developing, pilot testing, and delivering the virtual platform and all of its supporting content from initial concept through deployment. The live system includes a web-based assessment delivery engine, certificant dashboard, and interfaces that support self-reflective assessments, multiplechoice practice knowledge assessments called mini practice quizzes, animated case simulations, and games as educational experiences. Prior to the full implementation of the new virtual continuing competency platform, a pilot test including 512 unique testers accessing 6,561 assessment tools was conducted. This paper will introduce the program at a high level and discuss the design process to frame discussion and then share the descriptive results of the user pilot study. While this specific program targets occupational therapy certificants, the virtual platform, focus areas, and lessons learned regarding use of a large scale virtual assessment program apply to other domains. The team will share generalized recommendations for future design and development of advanced technology-enabled assessment, certification, and educational experiences based upon our findings. 50 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MOBILE APP DESIGN FOR VETERANS WITH PHYSICAL AND COGNITIVE LIMITATIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15182 Nina P. Deibler, Lea G. Blake Serco Inc. Pittsburgh, PA, Richmond, VA Devin Harrison, William Plew U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Atlanta, GA, Nashville, TN Pressure ulcers are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among hospitalized, institutionalized, and mobility-compromised Veterans, and the prevalence of pressure ulcers has been an ongoing challenge for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). With the VA currently serving World War II- through Post-911-era Veterans with Service-, age-, and illness-related physical and cognitive limitations, the VA sought an innovative solution to educate and support the full spectrum of Veterans at risk of developing pressure ulcers. They selected the VA Pressure Ulcer Resource (VAPUR) project to design a hybrid Mobile Application (App) providing this “just-in-time” education and performance support for Veterans and their Caregivers. In addition to educational content structured as frequently asked questions with graphics and videos, the App allows Veterans to securely self-report wound data to the VA using a simply worded form. This reporting capability enhances the VA’s ability to monitor Veterans who live too far from specialized wound care facilities to get regular pressure ulcer care. The App supports Veterans with cognitive limitations by automating functions like setting reminders for daily tasks, dialing help and locating resources, and communicating with medical providers. The VA Human Factors Team tested the App with Veterans to ensure usability heuristics and industry-wide standards were focal points in the design. The VA Section 508 Accessibility Team also tested the App to ensure it optimizes the accessibility features in current operating systems and fully complies with all Section 508 requirements. Because standard App interfaces and traditional educational approaches were insufficient for the diverse target audience, this paper discusses the unique human-computer interface design considerations made for users with physical and cognitive limitations. It also discusses how the resulting design can be reused for other Apps, particularly for conditions like COPD, heart disease, and diabetes. VAPUR will be deployed in August 2015. STRUCTURED DEVELOPMENT OF INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE PHYSICIAN KNOWLEDGE RETENTION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15095 Lloyd Werk, Maria Carmen Diaz, Lorie Ingraham, James Crutchfield James P. Franciosi, Tim Wysocki Lockheed Martin Nemours Children’s Health System Mission Systems and Training Jacksonville, FL Orlando, FL Military and civilian healthcare is undergoing radical transformations in almost every aspect of patient care from diagnosis to treatment. Along with increased complexity in the technology of delivery systems and procedures, medical knowledge is expanding at an ever-increasing rate, and yet clinicians are expected to retain knowledge and remain proficient in their fields. Frequency of exposure to specific clinical problems and processes are known contributors to physicians’ decay of clinical knowledge and proficiencies. For example, while deployed, military physicians may experience less demand for specific clinical skills and are, therefore, at risk for knowledge decay. A systematically applied knowledge retention program integrated with continuous training is one possible response. However, institutionalizing standardized training at fixed intervals for all may not be the most cost-effective nor efficient solution. This paper discusses the progress of a research study tasked to develop and validate efficient interventions to mitigate physician knowledge decay that address both increased domain complexity and lower frequencies of exposure. The process of intervention selection is based on the analysis of elements of the care for nine targeted clinical problems that reveal physician knowledge decay with decreasing frequency of exposure to those clinical problems. Once the most critical elements of the care process have been identified, we apply a structured approach for selecting, developing, and evaluating possible interventions geared towards choosing those that specifically address identified knowledge needs and align with the organization’s learning goals, infrastructure and operating budgets. Recommendations for a systematic, yet flexible, method for evaluating, weighing and scoring multiple knowledge decay mitigation alternatives are included, supporting interventions ranging from static job aids to immersive learning simulations. In summary, this paper proposes a comprehensive selection model for continuing medical education programs committed to prevent skill decay, aid knowledge retention and improve overall physician and organizational performance. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 51 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-2 Analyze This 1600 Work Domain Analysis for Ecological Interface Design of Tangible Interfaces (15130) 1630 Adaptive Testing: Adapt and Overcome the Shortfalls of Traditional Proficiency Assessments (15196) 1700 Cognitive Load Assessment for Intelligence Analysts through Full Motion Video Analytics (15142) Notes WORK DOMAIN ANALYSIS FOR ECOLOGICAL INTERFACE DESIGN OF TANGIBLE INTERFACES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15130 Michael W. Boyce, Robert A. Sottilare, Benjamin Goldberg & Charles R. Amburn Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate Simulation and Training Technology Center Orlando, FL This research developed a Work Domain Analysis (WDA) to help in guiding the design of a user interface for the Augmented REality Sandtable (ARES). ARES combines the traditional military sandtable used in sandtable exercises with projected topography. It leverages commercial off the shelf software in an effort to provide affordable simulation technology. In order to create an interface that is usable, valid, representative of the environment, and free from unnecessary elements, there is a need to perform a top to bottom domain analysis that can be validated by experts. This assists in deciding interface grouping, visual mapping, and ease of learning in the operational environment. WDA takes the relationships that exist between interface components and translates those into tangible interface design specifications. WDA, a foundation for ecological interface design (EID), will be leveraged in future usability experiments as well as the incorporation of a tutor to ARES. The WDA uncovered common functionality and unexpected relationships between the interface components to better support the tasks of land navigation, and military tactics training to support mission needs. Detailed breakdown of these domains can help to serve as guidance for other projects looking for a structured basis for interface design. 52 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ADAPTIVE TESTING: ADAPT AND OVERCOME THE SHORTFALLS OF TRADITIONAL PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15196 Robert “Mac” McLaughlin, Dr. Stephen Gunter Camber Corporation Orlando, FL Jeff Pearson Veterans Benefits Administration Orlando, FL Most military tests direct outcomes to a simple pass or fail; a Go/No Go model in which the individual must meet specific standards of performance. Another testing approach can assess critical job competencies and current proficiency levels across a continuum, which ranges from entry level to mastery. When implemented for occupational specialties and skill areas for which it is suited, such a model offers significant long-term advantages in maximizing training budgets, and developing skill mastery throughout a warfighter’s career. Specific proficiency levels may be designated as minimum standards for different pay-grades, or for testing similar jobs sharing common competencies at different required levels of proficiency. Unlike a binary pass/fail approach, this identifies specific areas and the degree of remedial training required to meet standards. It also identifies gradual skill decay and offers targeted remediation before it reaches the point of certification failure. Over the long term, this can reduce training expenses by identifying specific training requirements. Standard remedial training approaches are often very broad, with participants sitting through hours of training on standards, which they may actually meet, waiting for the specific training content in which they are deficient. It may also allow for faster advancement to skill mastery, as targeted remediation means additional training hours are available for skill advancement beyond minimum certification standards. Identifying areas of skill decay provides for a just-in-time training approach that can reduce future test failures and the impact of individuals taken away from their primary job for corrective training. Adaptive test engines, which use a branching logic to adjust test question difficulty at multiple points during the test, offer an effective means to achieve this outcome. This paper presents an overview of the benefits of a diagnostic testing model, steps required for its implementation, and experiences designing such a test.. COGNITIVE LOAD ASSESSMENT FOR INTELLIGENCE ANALYSTS THROUGH FMV (FMV) ANALYTICS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15142 Elizabeth Wilson Chenega Technical Innovations, LLC Dumfries, VA Upesh Patel US Army Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD The U.S. military has made a significant investment in fielding a wide variety of airborne and ground Full-motion Video (FMV) electro-optical and infrared sensors to provide superior situational awareness and persistent surveillance of the battlefield. These sensors collect an increasingly unmanageable amount of data, up to terabytes per hour from a single wide area motion imagery sensor. Even with conventional FMV sensors, the data being produced far exceed the number of intelligence analysts available to manually exploit the data. Together, the U.S. Army CommunicationsElectronics Research, Development and Engineering Center, U.S. Army Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate (I2WD), and the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) are working to address this operational need. The project to provide an initial material capability to meet these requirements is named Advanced Video Activity Analytics (AVAA). The AVAA is maturing a video processing exploitation framework (VPEF), a video data model (VDM), a video annotation web service (VAWS), and integrating computer vision analytic algorithms as plug-ins. The framework provides standardization, integration, and parallelization of computer vision algorithms (CVAs), making them interoperable and testable. The system processes large-scale data and manages the results using a video data model. This paper describes the formulation for testing and evaluation conducted at the Army Intelligence Center of Excellence at Fort Huachuca, AZ, to measure AVAA’s ability to improve video data processing and to reduce the cognitive load on analysts while providing the building blocks for improved knowledge discovery across Intelligence domains. The techniques can be applied to understand and refine cognitive load on training. Quickly processed full-motion imagery data can also facilitate population of simulation data for an experimentation or training event. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 53 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-3 Do You Understand? 0830 Multi-measure Assessment of Internal Distractions on Driver Performance (15017) 0900 Measuring Trust of Autonomous Vehicles: A Development and Validation Study (15049) 0930 Building Trust in a Human-Robot Team with Automatically Generated Explanations (15315) Notes MULTI-MEASURE ASSESSMENT OF INTERNAL DISTRACTIONS ON DRIVER PERFORMANCE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15012 Kevin F. Hulme Center for Engineering Design and Applied Simulation (CEDAS) Buffalo, NY Karen L. Morris The Center for Children and Families (CCF) Buffalo, NY Gregory A. Fabiano Department of Counseling, School, and Educational Psychology Buffalo, NY Mark G. Frank Department of Communications Buffalo, NY Rebecca J. Houston Research Institute on Addictions Buffalo, NY Panos Ch. Anastasopoulos Department of Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering Buffalo, NY The primary objective of this effort is to employ a high fidelity simulator for a small pilot study to assess the impact of internal distractions on traffic safety. While all vehicle distractions have the potential to endanger driver, passenger, and bystander safety, distractions internal to the driver (i.e., mindlessness, being lost-in-thought, mind wandering) can be defined as “the decoupling of attention from the task at hand coincident with a shift in focus to internal thought processes.” Recent studies estimate that internally-distracted driving is the least understood and most deadly form of distracted driving: 62% of all driving fatality cases involving distractions are “internal.” By contrast, the second deadliest source of distraction, cell phone usage, accounts for 12% of fatalities. Internal Distraction is often unintentional, and can last from a split second to numerous minutes, and while driving, has been shown to occur most frequently during low-stimulus drives. Regardless of content, length, or intensity, whenever perception and attention are decoupled, the risk of “looking but not seeing” increases, along with the likelihood of driver error. Previous research in this area has documented impairments in driver performance while internally distracted, however the reliability with which internal distraction was “induced” in simulation remains a point of contention. Most simulator-based research that has analyzed the topic employs a “straight road, car following” model to induce mind wandering. In this study, we employ a Route Familiarity scenario coupled with an Unusual Uses Task (UUT) to induce a state of internal distraction while driving. Our novel multi-measure assessment includes: self-report, evaluator observation, and simulator performance measurement (e.g., lane position, speed, following distance). Physiological metrics (e.g., facial expression, eye pupil dilation) with on-board cameras are captured for future analysis. Ultimately, the outcomes of this investigation could lead to countermeasures (e.g., vehicle technologies, improved practices in road geometry, signage, targeted training) that mitigate negative driving outcomes resulting from internal distraction. 54 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts HOW HUMANS TRUST AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES: A STUDY IN MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT AND PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15049 David R. Garcia, Christine Kreutzer, and Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola University of Central Florida, Psychology Department Orlando, Florida Recent advances in technology have improved the ability of vehicles to act autonomously, thereby enabling the implementation of these systems into the lives of the everyday consumers. For example, in the past three years several major vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, and technology companies have announced projects involving autonomous vehicles (AVs). While the notion of AVs has been popular within the military, the urgency to make them commonplace has gathered pace as companies outside the auto industry have illustrated the feasibility and benefits that AVs offer. However, in order to predict user adoption of these autonomous features, attitudes towards them must be understood. Thus, the purpose of the present work is to develop and validate a scale to quantify trust towards autonomous vehicles. The data was subjected to a factor analysis with Promax rotation, yielding two factors. A number of correlations between trust towards autonomous features and personality were also identified. Finally, differences in trust between autonomous levels were identified. BUILDING TRUST IN A HUMAN-ROBOT TEAM WITH AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED EXPLANATIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15315 Ning Wang, David V. Pynadath University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA Susan G. Hill U.S. Army Research Laboratory Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD Technological advances offer the promise of robotic systems that work with people to form human-robot teams that are more capable than their individual members. Unfortunately, the increasing capability of such autonomous systems has often failed to increase the capability of the human-robot team. Studies have identified many causes underlying these failures, but one critical aspect of a successful human-machine interaction is trust. When robots are more suited than humans for a certain task, we want the humans to trust the robots to perform that task. When the robots are less suited, we want the humans to appropriately gauge the robots’ ability and have people perform the task manually. Failure to do so results in disuse of robots in the former case and misuse in the latter. Real-world case studies and laboratory experiments show that failures in both cases are common. Researchers have theorized that people will more accurately trust an autonomous system, such as a robot, if they have a more accurate understanding of its decisionmaking process. Studies show that explanations offered by an automated system can help maintain trust with the humans in case the system makes an error, indicating that the robot’s communication transparency can be an important factor in earning an appropriate level of trust. To study how robots can communicate their decision making process to humans, we have designed an agent-based online test-bed that supports virtual simulation of domain-independent human-robot interaction. In the simulation, humans work together with virtual robots as a team. The test-bed allows researchers to conduct online human-subject studies and gain better understanding of how robot communication can improve human-robot team performance by fostering better trust relationships between humans and their robot teammates. In this paper, we describe the details of our design, and illustrate its operation with an example human-robot team reconnaissance task. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 55 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-4 It’s a Wild, Wild Cyber World 1030 Automated Performance Assessment in Cyber Training Exercises (15044) 1100 Command Shift: Exploring Modern Gaming Technologies to Create NextGeneration Offensive Cyber Operations (OCO) Interfaces (15091) 1130 Embedded Cyber-Physical Systems for Assessing Performance in Training Simulations (15263) Notes AUTOMATED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT IN CYBER TRAINING EXERCISES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15044 Robert G. Abbott, Jonathan McClain, Benjamin Anderson, Kevin Nauer, Austin Silva & Chris Forsythe Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM USA Cyber threats have become ubiquitous as criminals extend their reach and cyber becomes a front in conflicts between different peoples and a major source of revenue for criminal organizations. Personnel responsible for cyber defense are becoming increasing critical. However, there is a shortfall between the number of individuals training to enter cyber security and the projected demand for these skills. Consequently, methods and technologies are needed to enhance and accelerate the training of cyber security personnel. Previous research has demonstrated the benefits of automated performance assessments as a means to target training to the specific needs of individual students. The current paper describes an extension of these capabilities to cyber security training exercises. In these exercises, students are placed in teams and must work together, using appropriate software tools and online resources, to conduct forensic analysis for cyber crimes. Individual and team performance is assessed on the basis of successfully solving individual challenges and applying information from individual challenges to correctly ascertain an overall picture of the who, what and why of the crimes. The current paper describes a framework for conducting cyber security training exercises with an emphasis on instrumentation to enable automated performance assessment. Instrumentation captures students’ computer-based transactions in a log that is time-synched with the game-server used to deliver challenges and register student responses. Analyses were conducted to better understand the factors that distinguish more or less effective student performance and techniques developed to automatically parse logs of student activities into meaningful blocks of taskoriented activity. These capabilities are a prerequisite for the development of real-time automated assessment of student performance within the context of cyber security exercises. 56 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts COMMAND SHIFT: EXPLORING MODERN GAMING TECHNOLOGIES TO CREATE NEXTGENERATION OCO INTERFACES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15091 Chad Caison KEYW Corporation Hanover, MD Jennifer McNamara BreakAway Games Hunt Valley, MD Offensive Cyber Operations (OCO) are complex tasks involving abstract and logical concepts that are difficult for end users to synthesize and engage with. Typical user engagement involves using a keyboard and mouse, and working with Command Line or Graphical User Interfaces (CLIs and GUIs). While these tools let users command tools, they do not provide robust situational awareness and they require extensive training and experience to achieve competence. This paper describes the analysis, design, and development of a new cyber interface that uses input and visualization methods borrowed from the game industry to fully immerse the operator more naturally in the cyber battlespace. This type of tool has never been used in the OCO space and has neither been openly welcomed nor understood within the community. Until now, stakeholders have not seen a prototype to demonstrate the potential of this more natural type of interface, which gives the operator a better understanding of the abstract environment to facilitate better decision making and reduce human mistakes. To create this new user interface, two organizations collaborated: one representing current OCO training and stateof-the-art OCO tools, and the other representing game design. Together, these organizations designed a new cyber interface focused on three primary goals: to reduce complexity and training time, to improve situational awareness, and to reduce human error. This paper discusses the standard OCO work environment and its challenges for end users, the results of our user analysis that drove the design process, the game-based hardware and software considerations used by the team, and the prototype interface itself, along with informal playtest reactions from end users. EMBEDDING CYBER-PHYSICAL SYSTEMS FOR ASSESSING PERFORMANCE IN TRAINING SIMULATIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15263 P. Shane Gallagher ADL Alexandria, VA Brenda Bannan & Bridgette Lewis GMU Fairfax, VA Shelly Blake-Plock Yet Analytics Baltimore, MD As a result of next-generation networking and the Internet of Things (IoT) technologies, big data analysis is possible and has been shown to have a positive impact on areas of national significance yet requires new tools to deal with the variety and quantity of data multiplying at an exponential rate.. Concurrently, IoT technologies are rapidly becoming a mainstream data source. Training simulations have historically been limited either to computer-based simulations or live human-observable field-based simulations ;however, IoT technologies can open up innovative, hybrid digitalphysical opportunities both for delivering and for understanding the outcomes of training in a much more dynamic and comprehensive way. The feasibility of IoT technologies in training has historically been limited by interoperability and scale. However, Advanced Distributed Learning’s Experience Application Programming Interface (xAPI) allows interoperability and scale in next-generation training environments and provides a way to standardize the formative data of human experience captured through digital context. It also provides a way to capture information and formalize human experience from multiple and varied networked devices into standardized, human-readable statements. These can inform both human and machine learning through leveraging big data analysis and interoperability of the IoT technologies. By leveraging the xAPI and IoT technologies as a cyber-physical system embedded in virtual and live training scenarios, it is possible to capture and measure real-time team performance for immediate analysis and remediation or for post hoc analysis in after action reviews. This paper discusses the application of learning analytics and design for an IoT context through describing the implementation of 1) a live action medical simulation as part of the Global Smart Cities Challenge (sponsored by the NIST and the OSTP) and 2) the proposed capture and analysis of communication performance data and measures within specific coalition training scenarios supporting the 2015 Bold Quest Assessment sponsored by the Joint Fires Division of the Joint Staff. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 57 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-5 Maintaining Your Cool 1400 Human Performance in Content Design for Interactive Augmented Reality Systems (15156) 1430 Using Micro and Macro Studies of Tablets to Improve Maintenance (15279) Notes HUMAN PERFORMANCE IN CONTENT DESIGN FOR INTERACTIVE AUGMENTED REALITY SYSTEMS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15156 Louise Yarnall, Sara Vasquez, Anna Werner, Rakesh (Teddy) Kumar, Supun Samarasekera, Girish Acharya, Glenn Murray, Michael Wolverton, Zhiwei Zhu,Vlad Branzoi, Nicholas Vitovitch, & Jim Carpenter SRI International Menlo Park, CA and Princeton, NJ The military is exploring the use of new technologies to improve the training of a large pool of personnel to maintain and repair a variety of complex equipment. Achieving technology integration in maintenance training requires developers to clear three human performance hurdles: physical usability, learning content efficacy, and a path to integration with existing learning methods. Augmented reality technologies smoothly project explanatory visuals (e.g., text, directional arrows, videos, and 2D and 3D animations) over the workspace. Interactive technologies verbally dictate steps to the user and respond to users’ spoken commands (e.g., “Computer, repeat step.”). In developing ARMentor, an innovative maintenance training technology that combines augmented reality and interactive dialogue technologies, a team of engineers and education researchers encountered and responded to each of the human performance hurdles. In this paper, we show how these human performance hurdles were addressed and how they informed the refinement of the AR-Mentor in two rounds of system development and testing. The AR-Mentor system provides a Heads-up and Hands-free experience to permit a user to train with real equipment. The AR-Mentor system consists of a compact computer, head worn cameras, microphone, ear-buds, and augmented reality eyewear. The learning content addressed in the two rounds of testing focused on both basic training in maintenance procedures and more advanced training in troubleshooting. The performance evaluation measured usability, time to learn, and the relative learning achievement in procedural knowledge and troubleshooting reasoning between business-as-usual instruction and technology-assisted learning conditions. The paper concludes by presenting key human performance concepts for trainers and vendors of complex equipment systems to consider when designing technological content for presentation with newer automated instructional technologies such as AR-Mentor. 58 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts USING MICRO AND MACRO STUDIES OF TABLETS TO IMPROVE MAINTENANCE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15279 Robert Pokorny, Ph.D., Jacqueline Haynes, Ph.D. & Lisa Holt, Ph.D. Intelligent Automation, Inc. Rockville, Maryland Michael diPilla Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Navy maintenance is becoming increasingly difficult with more complicated systems, reduced staffing, and efforts to reduce expensive training time. To improve maintenance readiness, the Navy is testing tablets by which technicians receive performance aids and directly connect with the larger Navy maintenance enterprise system. Technicians’ performance can be improved by (1) micro controlled experiments which investigate interface details of accessing and presenting content via tablets and (2) macro field tests that illustrate the effect of technological tools in their deployed state. A comprehensive approach to improve productivity and decrease cost through tools is best informed by both micro and macro studies, and to integrate the results of both to create and promote Navy goals. The micro element of our approach is the study of how a tablet-based presentation of procedures can be structured to provide technicians the support needed to maximize performance. We will report results from one such study, identifying difficulties introduced by tablets and how they can be overcome, and the capabilities now possible with interactive tablets. The macro element of our comprehensive approach is the study of how the Navy maintenance technicians can benefit when connected to enterprise resources. Technician benefits include an ability to order components when technicians are in the field, access updated technical documentation, and automatically collect work performance data which reduces redundant paperwork and enables big-data analytics to identify interesting trends of previously unknown efficiencies and performance difficulties. We will report results from a recent field test that includes lessons learned from connecting technicians to the enterprise system. Micro studies provide scientific verification of principles used to develop the solution, and macro studies reveal how well the solution improves work flow and productivity in the Navy context. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-6 Flight Life 1600 Helicopter Pilot’s Modeling Including the Stress Factor (15168) 1630 Human-in-the-Loop Flight Simulation Study of Virtual Constructive Representation on Live Avionics Displays (15197) 1700 Practical Recommendations for Validating Survey Apparatus in Coalition Training Environments (15299) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 59 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts HELICOPTER PILOT’S MODELING INCLUDING THE STRESS FACTOR 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15168 Antoni Kopyt Warsaw University of Technology Warsaw, Poland In the modeling and simulation domain the human is often considered as an inherent system element. In most studies his/her model remains unchanged due to the external factors. Concerning the wide studies on human performance, workload impact, psychological aspects of human behavior, such an assumption might be too far of a simplification. The present study proves, that a relationship between the mental stress and human dynamics cannot be neglected. The dynamic characteristics of the operator’s model, change in the function of external stimuli i.e. mental stress must be considered. The aim of this study was to present identification of a mathematical human model and measurement methodology of the mental stress level during various work conditions. 20 pilots form Polish Air force Academy were involved. Pilots performed a slalom maneuver task on a SW-4 helicopter flight simulator. Subjects had to repeat slalom maneuver three times, each time, the work conditions were different. The simulator software allowed the registration of flight parameters during the experiment. The analysis of collected data were used to assess the flight efficiency of each task. Pilot’s mental stress level was measured with NASA Task Load Index survey. Additionally, to determine the level of pilot’s response to external stimuli, the electrocardiography (ECG) and skin impedance methods were applied. Finally, base on registered data, the typical dynamic models of each pilot have been identified. Consequently the models obtained from various flight conditions were compared with the stress level respectively. The comparison of model parameters and detailed analysis identified some tendencies in models. The presented paper proves that human susceptibility to external factors directly transfers into dynamic models. The study shows that using more complex models that includes stress factors is much closer to the real human behavior. HUMAN-IN-THE-LOOP FLIGHT SIMULATION STUDY OF VIRTUAL CONSTRUCTIVE REPRESENTATION ON LIVE AVIONICS DISPLAYS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15197 Dr. Tom “Mach” Schnell Operator Performance Lab University of Iowa Iowa City, IA Dr. Angus “Mac” McLean, Mr. Scott Rediger Advanced Technology Center (ATC) Rockwell Collins Cedar Rapids, IA The integration of virtual and constructive elements into live training not only opens new training avenues, but also raises concerns about flight safety as live aircraft trainees need to be able to differentiate between live and virtual entities and threats. Current fourth-generation fighter aircraft lack an integrated avionics methodology to provide this Live Virtual Constructive (LVC) specific situation awareness (SA). A flight simulation study was performed to assess fighter pilot behaviors in an air-to-air context involving virtual (V) and constructive (C) red force representations. LVC enabled avionics systems were used involving a networked federation comprised of two fast jet flight simulators, a fighter trainer jet aircraft configured as an aircraft-in-the-loop (AIL) simulator, a Ground Control Intercept (GCI) station, and a Next Generation Threat System (NGTS) semi-automated forces (SAF) generator. Participants were nonactive duty fighter pilots. The objective of the study was to attempt to detect and quantify specific, important attributes of aircrew condition and performance and to show the relationship to VC-enabled training situations. The results indicate that that red air entity count significantly drove fighter pilot workload and engagement. We also found a statistically non-significant trend that V red air entities tended to generate a higher workload than C red air. 60 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR VALIDATING SURVEY APPARATUSES IN COALITION TRAINING ENVIRONMENTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No.15299 Emilie Reitz Alion S&T Norfolk, VA If a training event happens and no one builds a record of its gains and outcomes, does it matter? How do you know that the gains and outcomes you recorded, or the tools you used to make that record, are even valid and generalizable to other situations? Are you really improving human performance, or just inferring that you improved it? It’s a challenge faced by all communities of research (Teijlingen & Hundley, 2002), whether attempting to solicit survey data in support of human factors assessments or training effectiveness analyses. This challenge is increased in multinational events, where results contribute to a shared end state for the coalition. To create a valid new measurement apparatus, reliability and validity must be established, and correlations should be built between subscales. Nonetheless, that takes time, results measured from a comparable apparatus or repeated tests, and access to audiences that many researchers lack. During Bold Quest 15.1, two apparatuses were run for precisely this testing and validation purpose and presented to the multinational training audience under one of two circumstances: uncommented testing of the apparatuses or careful explanation of the validation and verification purpose. Two-hundred and seven participants provided over 1600 free text responses which were taken as indicators of their engagement with each apparatus, compared against a non-pilot-tested survey. The pilot-tested apparatuses that were actively administered, elicited significantly more productive responses from the participants than the passive administration groups. Recommendations focus on optimizing apparatuses that cannot be translated into a native language due to constraints, and provide suggestions to bolster both pilot tested and non-pilot tested apparatuses. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-7 Is That Your Final Decision? 0830 Stealth Assessment of ProblemSolving Skills from Gameplay (15212) 0900 “Fixing” the Military DecisionMaking Process (15220) 0930 The Small Unit Decision Making Assessment Battery: Development and Psychometric Analysis (15143) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 61 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts STEALTH ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEM-SOLVING SKILLS FROM GAMEPLAY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15212 Weinan Zhao, Valerie Shute, Lubin Wang Florida State University Tallahassee, FL Stealth assessment represents a promising way to address the needs of validly measuring and supporting important 21st century competencies (e.g., creativity, problem solving) within interactive digital environments (e.g., video games). The assessment is woven into the environment such that it becomes invisible to students, which is conducive to eliciting targeted competencies (Shute, 2011). Stealth assessment also runs dynamically, enabling real-time support. We use ECD (Evidence-Centered Design, Almond, & Lukas, 2003) as our assessment design framework for creating stealth assessments that capture far more information related to multiple competencies compared to traditional forms of assessment, which typically report a single summative score, and/or or judgments of right or wrong. To date, we have developed a number of stealth assessments for use in different games to examine various competencies. For example, we have designed three stealth assessments to measure various cognitive and noncognitive variables in a game called Physics Playground (Shute & Ventura, 2013). The focal competencies included persistence (Ventura, Shute, & Small, 2014), qualitative physics knowledge (Shute, Ventura, & Kim, 2013), and creativity (Kim & Shute, in press). From these design and development efforts, we have learned a number of useful lessons about developing and applying stealth assessment. This will comprise the focus of our paper—lessons learned and best practices related to the design process of stealth assessment. We will demonstrate the process of designing stealth assessment using a research project that assesses problem solving skill in the popular game Plants vs. Zombies 2. Results from our evaluation study show that our game-based assessment is promising, correlating with the external measures of problem solving: Raven’s progressive matrices (r = .40, p < .01) and MicroDYN (r = .48, p < .01). However a larger sample size is needed to establish definite claims about its validity. “FIXING” THE MILITARY DECISION MAKING PROCESS (MDMP) 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15220 Michael J. Smith, Ronald B. Sprinkle Leidos, Inc. Orlando, FL LTC(P) Johnny Powers PEO STRI Orlando, FL James Xu Adayana Falls Church, VA Michael Knapp Aptima, Inc. Orlando, FL The U.S. Army Military Decision Making Process (MDMP), used for planning operations, is a deliberate, time intensive, manual process. Critics state that MDMP Course of Action (COA) Analyses take too long to arrive at a single plan. COA analysis and Running Estimate (real time comparison of a running operation against the plan) require data to measure and compare combat actions. Many assert that the only viable way to automate and measure proposed COAs is to use data produced by simulation. Historically, simulations have been difficult to setup, require specially trained personnel and separate computing hardware to operate, making their application impractical in a tactical environment. To address these problems, we developed a concept prototype and architecture to make practical use of simulation to support the MDMP. We believe that “fixing” the MDMP means increasing its speed through rapid automated decision support. During development of the prototype, we explored the technical barriers and military planning process updates that would help automate the MDMP with simulation support. U.S. Army simulations require several major modifications to be practical in a Mission Command Information System (MCIS) environment. First, technical support requirements must be eliminated. Second, an interface that supports the input of plans and operations by Warfighting planners is needed. Third, Warfighters must be able to specify measurement of COAs, plans, and operations. In addition, recognizing the human/machine boundaries in the decision-making process, we must be mindful that simulation systems cannot present conclusions that can only be fully developed by experienced warfighters. This paper shows how these things can be done and addresses primary MDMP criticisms. 62 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THE SMALL UNIT DECISION MAKING ASSESSMENT BATTERY: DEVELOPMENT AND PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15143 Karol G. Ross, Jennifer K. Phillips Cognitive Performance Group Orlando, Florida Kenneth A. Knarr II Corps Consultants, Inc. Quantico, Virginia The U.S. Marine Corps Training and Education Command is developing a requirement for a set of measures to assess cognitive abilities in support of small unit decision-making challenges. Prior assessment efforts in this area of research have failed to address several key issues, including the multidimensionality of decision making and the ability to predict decision performance across a range of operational settings. This paper reports on the development of a Small Unit Decision Making Assessment Battery that treats decision performance as a multidimensional construct supported by competencies, such as problem solving and attentional control, and cognitive and relational skills, such as perspective taking and resilience. Candidate battery instruments were selected or developed based on their face validity and existing psychometric properties as measures of 15 constructs hypothesized to enable small unit decision making. The instruments were subjected to comprehensive testing with a large population from The Basic School to assess their psychometric properties and to finalize each instrument. Analyses were performed at item, battery, and relationship levels to identify the most meaningful items and improve internal consistency reliability, examine the factor structure of each instrument, and identify the constructs most predictive of decision-making proficiency. Results indicate the predictive ability of the battery and the ability of the battery to distinguish levels of performance by correctly, significantly classifying participants into different performance levels. This research furthers the community’s understanding of decision making as a multidimensional construct. Plans for future research and application are discussed. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-8 From the Halls of Montezuma 1030 MarineNet User Engagement Exercise (15011) 1100 Supporting Unit Training Management Through Mobile Performance Assessment Tools (15034) 1130 Marine Corps Instructor Master Model: A Foundation for Marine Faculty Professional Development (15146) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 63 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MARINENET USER ENGAGEMENT EXERCISE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15011 Major Michael A. Gavin, USMC College of Distance Education & Training Quantico, VA The Marine Corps Distance Learning Network (MarineNet) is the United States Marine Corps’ enterprise level Learning Management System. MarineNet is employed to increase operational readiness by improving training quality and accessibility for individual Marines. The Marine Corps University’s (MCU) College of Distance Education and Training (CDET) is the entity responsible for managing MarineNet. Like many technology heavy organizations, CDET has encountered several challenges in adapting and aligning organizational practices with emerging technologies and evolving user needs. This paper details CDET’s efforts to mitigate these challenges through the conduct of the MarineNet User Engagement Exercise (MUE2). The MUE2 was executed as an instructor led discussion and survey. Participants were drawn from the I, II, and III Marine Expeditionary Forces, Marine Forces Reserve, and MCU’s Professional Military Education resident schoolhouses. The problem the MUE2 research addressed focused on the development of a procedural method to tap into the range and depth of knowledge available within the MarineNet end user community. Based on the principles of human-centered design, the MUE2 is a requirements elicitation project that directly engaged the MarineNet end user community as an exploitable systems design asset. The objective of the MUE2 was to give voice to the MarineNet end user population and to provide CDET with a contextually based understanding of the concerns held by the end user community. The purpose of the MUE2 was to provide CDET with a data-driven decision support methodology on which the architecture changes designed to improve MarineNet’s capabilities could be validated and appropriately prioritized. SUPPORTING UNIT TRAINING MANAGEMENT THROUGH MOBILE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT TOOLS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15034 Courtney Dean Aptima, Inc. Woburn, MA Matthew Puglisi, Jared Freeman, Ph.D. Aptima, Inc. Washington, D.C. The Marine Corps Training Information Management System (MCTIMS) warehouses performance information regarding all mission essential tasks Marine Corps units must perform in order to execute across the full range of military operations. MCTIMS currently has a requirement for a mobile application. This application enables Marine leaders to collect unit performance data digitally in the field and quickly upload those data into MCTIMS, avoiding laborious manual input of each result. The application’s concept of operations is as follows: 1) download performance evaluation criteria from MCTIMS; 2) provide leaders with inputs to capture performance ratings; 3) display results immediately following an exercise to enable After Action Reviews (AARs) and; 4) upload results to MCTIMS to support tracking of trends across the force. A prototype application, MCTIMS Mobile, was developed for testing and feasibility assessment. The application was tested in two live-fire exercises where usability and utility metrics were captured. The goals of the field tests were to informally evaluate, with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and proposed users, the ability of the MCTIMS Mobile tool to support productive trainee assessment and efficient data collection and measurement. The field study demonstrated support for the tool, with clear directions for improvements. The results show that the tool works as expected, but certain features can be made more intuitive and easier to use. The quantitative results were interpreted very strictly and users provided substantial constructive feedback. Consideration of the feedback received from the users led to redesign and modification of the mobile tool. MCTIMS Mobile is intended to capture more data concerning Marine performance, better data (because it is captured in real time), and data that persist in MCTIMS to improve assessments of Marines and the training the Marine Corps provides. 64 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MARINE CORPS INSTRUCTOR MASTERY MODEL: A FOUNDATION FOR MARINE FACULTY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15146 Jennifer J. Vogel-Walcutt, Jennifer K. Phillips, Karol G. Ross Cognitive Performance Group Orlando, Florida Kenneth A. Knarr II Corps Consultants, Inc. Quantico, Virginia This paper reports on the creation of a USMC Instructor Mastery Model and its utilization for setting performance standards and assessing instructor performance. The Mastery Model is derived from the Dreyfus and Dreyfus model of cognitive skill acquisition. It makes the path to mastery explicit by specifying how individuals progressively develop into high performers and what indicators can be observed and assessed during each of five stages of development. To customize the model for Marine instructors, reviews of the literature and other services’ instructor development approaches were conducted. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 93 highly skilled instructors at 15 USMC learning institutions. Thematic analysis and card sorts were employed to understand what a skilled Marine instructor does and define 10 Key Performance Areas (KPAs). A second analysis examined how an instructor performs at the five stages of development and yielded performance indicators for each KPA at each stage. Outcomes were examined against teacher competencies from the literature to compare military and civilian instruction. The final set of KPAs has been adopted by TECOM and included in the Train the Trainer Training and Readiness (T&R) Manual in the form of five T&R events and five appended learning outcomes. The next step is to produce an Instructor Assessment Battery and observation rubric to enable assessment of individuals’ progressive skill development as well as program- and policy-level impact assessments. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320E H-9 Experience Counts 1330 Realism and Effectiveness of Robotic Moving Targets (15118) 1400 Soldier Physiological Changes of Shooting Performance in the Tank Simulator (15192) 1430 Novice and Experience Police Officer Simulation Experience: Guiding the Future (15370) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 65 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts REALISM AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ROBOTIC MOVING TARGETS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15118 Elizabeth Uhl Ph.D., Martin Bink Ph.D. U.S. Army Research Institute Fort Benning, GA David James Northrop-Grumman Technical Services Columbus, GA For the vast majority of U.S. Army Soldiers, the first opportunity to engage a realistic moving target with small arms is in combat. Even Infantry Soldiers and special-skill Soldiers (e.g., Snipers) have very limited opportunities to train realistic moving-target engagements. Current capabilities are limited to targets fixed to rail systems or silhouette targets mounted on pickets that can be walked by Soldiers in a firing-range target pit. Without the opportunity to practice engaging realistic moving targets, the Soldier is not able to develop the correct perceptual and motor tuning to adequately engage live moving targets. One solution for the lack of moving target training capabilities is the use of robotic human-type targets (RHTTs). RHTTs can present a realistic three-dimensional human-sized target that can freely move with semi-autonomous control. Furthermore, RHTTs can be programmed to react to events (e.g., flee after another RHTT is hit) and to move in groups in order to provide more complex training scenarios. Even though RHTTs provide a significant increase in training capability, the realism of the RHTTs will ultimately determine the training effectiveness of the capability. In a sense, the training effectiveness question is a matter of human-robot interaction. RHTTs are designed to emulate human beings moving over terrain, moving in a defined area, and reacting to scenario events. If the RHTTs are perceived as freely moving and acting humans, then training can be optimized. Perceptions of realism, shooting performance metrics, and training capabilities inventories were collected from Soldiers training with one type of RHTT to determine the level of target realism. Overall, the RHTT was determined to provide a realistic representation of human targets. However, several factors detracted from realism in certain scenarios. Both the factors that contributed to and the factors that detracted from realism provide insights for developing more effective RHTTs. EEG/ECG OSCILLATION OF SOLDIER’S MENTAL STATES ON THE SHOOTING TASKS IN THE TANK SIMULATOR 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15192 Li-Wei Ko, Peng-Wen Lai, Yi-Cheng Shih Shih-Chuan Lin, Meng-Shun Yang, Chin-Teng Lin Hsinchu, Taiwan R.O.C. In-Chung Chang Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C. Soldiers executing military missions, especially shooting tasks that involving visual attention are high level cognitive processes, which is highly correlated to the soldiers’ survival and fighting abilities in military operations. Current shooting simulation training in the military mainly focuses on the performance of target shooting and does not consider the soldier’s mental states to evaluate their performance. Therefore, this study intends to explore soldier’s mental states of visual attention corresponding to EEG oscillations when performing the simulated tank-shooter task. Soldiers are required to finish (5-times target shooting practice) with time constraint in the realistic tank-inspired cabin simulator. Physiological signals including 32-channel EEG signals and lead-II ECG signals are simultaneously recorded while performing shooting tasks. Using shooting scores and physiological measurements, we can further investigate the cross correlation with each other and figure out when will be the better time period to execute military mission. According to the preliminary study, in time-frequency domain, this study observed the correlation between task performance and the difference of frequency bands activities in each brain regions from junior and senior shooters. In terms of frequency domain, the study found that novices and skilled subjects have differences in prefrontal lobe, motor areas and occipital lobe. Based on these results, we constructed biomedical-signals models with attention, decision. A comprehensive analysis of shooting performance and physiological signals will be applied to construct a prediction model of the better-shooting state. The constructed model can effectively reflect the soldier’s mental states and could be considered as one of the evaluation indicators for target training performance in the future. 66 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts NOVICE AND EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER SIMULATION EXPERIENCE – GUIDING THE FUTURE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15370 Dr Amanda Davies Charles Sturt University Goulburn, NSW, Australia In the education and simulation design communities the deliberations continue which are centered on how much fidelity is enough or too much. This paper presents findings from a research project which explored the way in which fidelity influences the sense of immersion and presence and the subsequent perceived benefit to the transfer of learning to the field of application in police training for high-risk high-stakes decision-making. The unique feature of the study is the inclusion of two case studies, one of which utilizes low physical fidelity and high psychological fidelity with participants who are seasoned field based police operatives. The second simulation based learning exercise environment and scenario embraced high levels of physical and psychological fidelity with participants who have nil or limited operational experience in the real world of policing. The common criterion for the two simulation exercises is a pivotal catalyst which requires decisionmaking in providing a police response to a high risk incident. The findings suggest that a key design feature in the development and application of simulation-based learning environments and exercises is the level of prior real world experience the learner has with the simulated environment. This case study offers insight into the value learners place on the simulation characteristics in representing the real world environment and how this influences the application of knowledge and skills in their real world of policing the streets. Understanding the influence on field based application of simulated learning environments offers a valuable contribution to the instructional design endeavours for creating authentic situated learner experiences. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 2015 ROOM S320F P-1 Enterprise, Architecture, and Standards 1400 The Live-Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Enterprise Architecture (15076) 1445 Early Adoption of Common Operating Environment (COE) Standards and Guidelines (15098) Notes Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 67 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THE LIVE-SYNTHETIC TRAINING, TEST AND EVALUATION ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15076 Paul Dumanoir PEO STRI Orlando, FL Jeff Bergenthal, David Drake The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Laurel, MD Cross community and interservice Live-Synthetic (Virtual-Constructive-Gaming) initiatives often fail due to the lack of formalized governance, as stated by Frank DiGiovanni, Director, Force Readiness and Training in the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness), during the 2014 Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC). In March 2014, the US Army initiated a cross community Research and Development (R&D) initiative to investigate the feasibility of establishing a common LiveSynthetic approach for the Training and Test & Evaluation (T&E) communities, called the Live-Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Enterprise Architecture (LS TTE EA). This paper reports on the progress of this initiative in establishing the objective framework for the enterprise architecture (EA) that includes: (1) the initial governance approach, (2) the business architecture, and (3) the reference architecture. The governance approach provides agreed-upon practices and interactions for the formalized collaboration between organizations to build and deploy services that are useful and sustainable for the EA. The framework for the development and evolution of the governance approach for the LS TTE EA is outlined, including how the governance approach is being applied to current prototyping activities. The business architecture provides a common understanding to align Army strategic objectives and tactical Training and T&E demands. Business architecture artifacts and the results of a quick-look cost benefit analysis are discussed. The reference architecture is the authoritative source of information that guides the implementation of EA solutions. The reference architecture layers and initial documentation in Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) viewpoints are shown. Finally, the paper discusses the way forward for application of the EA objective framework to the Army’s Integrated Training Environment (ITE), Integrated Live-VirtualConstructive Test Environment (ILTE), and Synthetic Training Environment (STE), and applicability to the Defense Training Environment (DTE). EARLY ADOPTION OF COMMON OPERATING ENVIRONMENT (COE) STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15098 Robert Wittman, PhD MITRE Corporation McLean, VA Amit Kapadia US Army PEO STRI – PdM OneSAF Orlando, FL Burt Grippin, Sean Barie, Chris Holmes MITRE Corporation Orlando, FL Paul Dumanoir US Army PEO STRI – PdM WTI Orlando, FL This paper presents the driving requirements, results, and user-oriented use cases behind the Enterprise After Action Review (EAAR) prototype. The activity, funded in FY14 by Program Manager Integrated Training Environment (PM ITE), focused on producing a reusable AAR architecture with transferrable technologies and lessons learned for early adoption of the Common Operational Environment (COE) across PM ITE and PEO STRI. At project initiation it was clear the successful execution of a prototype depended on collaboration between the PM ITE team and engineers supporting the Command Post Computing Environment (CP CE) within PM Mission Command (MC). This paper starts by introducing earlier efforts that provided critical insight and software that led to the feasibility of the EAAR prototype investigation using COE constructs. It continues by highlighting common AAR requirements across the training and operational MC community. This sheds light on the potential for AAR system lifecycle costsavings through shared AAR component development and use across the two communities. The paper then explores the specific COE design constructs and technologies employed as part of the EAAR prototype effort. Finally, the paper concludes with a section on technology transfer progress and a listing of the COE and other standards-based technologies employed and their training or operational MC source. 68 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F P-2 Design, Build, Track and Train – Here and Abroad 1600 Sejong the Great Class DDGs: How ROK Navy Trained and Embraced Them (15032) 1645 A System-Model-Centric Collaborative Environment for the Acquisition Lifecycle (15093) Notes THE SEJONG THE GREAT CLASS DDGS: HOW ROK NAVY EMBRACED AND TRAINED THEM 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15032 LCDR Junho Eum, ROKN Ajou University Suwon, Republic of Korea CAPT Minsoo Yang, ROKN Republic of Korea Navy Busan, Republic of Korea Sangyoon Oh Ajou University Suwon, Republic of Korea The Aegis combat system has been widely considered as one of the most powerful weapon systems for surface ships due to its high level of war-fighting capability. In 2009, Republic of Korea (ROK) Navy became the fifth country in the world that operates Aegis combat system-equipped ships through the KDX-III program, and a total of three Sejong the Great class DDGs (Destroyers with Guided missile) are currently in fleet operations. These ships have performed an excellent level of war-fighting capabilities such as successful tracking missions for the missile provocations by North Korea and ROKS Sejong the Great’s top-gun award-winning at the firing competition during multi-national exercise. These are empirical supports showing outperformance of ROK Navy’s DDGs in spite of its relatively short period of operations as less than six years when compared to other countries operating similar Aegis equipped ships. In this paper, we introduce ROK Navy’s strategy, plan and efforts to realize these accomplishments in the KDX-III program, mainly focusing on how ROK Navy accomplished and settled a high level of war-fighting readiness in such a short period from the ship’s training and familiarization perspectives. Primarily, ship crew’s individual capability and team work as an entire ship force were considered as the fundamental for proper operation and maintenance, which precede the state-of-theart hardware such as system and weapons. We introduce ROK Navy’s systematic approach applied to training and familiarization as a core factor to maximize ship’s performance and readiness in this paper. From the beginning of the KDX-III program, a phased approach for ship crew was applied to develop skills from the basic to advance. Based on the programmatic foundation, we present plans and achievements by ROK Navy Headquarters and fleet operations, which provided various opportunities including on-board familiarization and utilization of the Aegis Operation and Maintenance Center (AOMTC) – ROK Navy’s own education and training facility for DDGs. At the end, we conclude with lessons learned and proposals to utilize these efforts for force improvements in the future. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 69 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts A SYSTEM-MODEL-CENTRIC COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION LIFECYCLE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15093 James E. Coolahan, Ph.D. Jeffery J. Bergenthal Coolahan Associates, LLC Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Ellicott City, MD Laurel, MD Since the mid-1990s, the U.S. Department of Defense has sought ways to improve the acquisition process by applying modeling and simulation (M&S) tools and data in a collaborative fashion involving government customers and industry providers. Originally known as (Distributed) Simulation Based Acquisition, over the past decade, these concepts have evolved under various monikers, including Model Based Systems Engineering, originated by the International Council on Systems Engineering, and Model Based Engineering, a term that has been used by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA). OSD has recently introduced a concept for a (Digital) System Model that evolves throughout the acquisition lifecycle, and the U.S. Air Force has coined the terms Digital Thread and Digital Twin that complement the OSD concept. As these concepts have evolved, the M&S Committee of NDIA’s Systems Engineering Division has performed two technical studies that help to describe the application of M&S tools/data during the acquisition lifecycle. This paper provides a summary of the results of these two studies. The first study, the identification of M&S capabilities across all acquisition lifecycle phases, resulted in the development of a multi-spreadsheet workbook that links activities in each lifecycle phase with M&S capabilities that support performing those activities, along with example tools that can be used to implement those M&S capabilities. The second study, the identification of essential elements of the system model, instantiates the high-level system model concept by defining the data/information needed for its implementation, linked to the acquisition activities and M&S capabilities identified during the first study. Finally, the paper presents a potential way ahead for integrating these concepts and studies to formulate a high-level approach for an overarching collaborative M&S environment centered on the system model concept. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F P-3 Developing Competency – The Future for M&S 1030 Improving Education, Training and Career Advancement through Competency Portability (15117) 1100 STEMulating: An Integrated Approach to Cultivating Our Future (15270) 1130 Modeling and Simulation Professionals – Meeting the Demand (15342) Notes 70 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts IMPROVING EDUCATION, TRAINING AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT THROUGH COMPETENCY PORTABILITY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15117 Robby Robson Eduworks Corporation Corvallis, Oregon “Competencies” – which in this paper include skills, knowledge, abilities, learning objectives, and outcomes – play a fundamental role in education, training and career advancement. This is reflected in the many standardized lists of competencies ranging from occupational standards (MOS and O*Net) and task lists (UJTL) to educational standards (Common Core Standards) and industry standards (NIMS, OPITO, etc.). It is also reflected in the emergence of organizations such as the Competency-Based Education Network (CBEN), and in initiatives sponsored by federal agencies such as the Departments of Labor, Defense, and Education, and the White House. Nonetheless, competencies are still not managed or exchanged in a standardized or interoperable way. Training systems cannot access lists of competencies through an Application Programming Interface (API), training packages define their own tasks and outcomes rather than use existing ones, and competency-based records of achievement are rarely transportable across military-civilian barriers. The consequences are severe: Jobs go unfilled by qualified unemployed workers (especially veterans) and billions of dollars are wasted because of unnecessary or ineffective training. Multiple efforts aim to change this. These include standardization efforts, technology development sponsored by the government and by private industry, and government initiatives. This paper provides an overview of competencies, reports on competency-related efforts, and discusses the implications for the training community. STEMULATING: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO CULTIVATING OUR FUTURE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15270 Elizabeth Biddle, Ph.D., CMSP CFSEC Orlando, FL Carol Ann Dykes UCF Business Incubator Orlando, FL Shawn Harrs, Ph.D. Universal Orlando Resort Orlando, FL Robert Seltzer NAWCTSD Orlando, FL Abdul Siddiqui PEO STRI Orlando, FL For over 50 years, the need to increase the number of students who pursue STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) has been acknowledged. Yet the US continues to fall behind in student performance in STEM fields and pursuit of STEM degrees (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2009; Galloway, 2008; Rothwell, 2014; National Research Council Committee on Science, Engineering Education Reform, 2006;). The STEM talent pool impacts not only the industries that drive the US economy but also those that comprise the US defense industrial base. Now more than ever, STEM underpins the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) ability to defend the Nation. While there are many factors that impact STEM education, a key element of increasing the STEM workforce is stronger local and regional partnerships among industry, academia, government, and nonprofits (Achieve, 2010). The Central Florida STEM Education Council (CFSEC) is a model of such a regional partnership with a long term objective of encouraging and preparing pre-college students to enter STEM fields of study and to pursue employment in the Central Florida workforce. The CFSEC targets primarily three audiences– parents, students and teachers – through communications and events. The CFSEC’s goals are to 1) advocate for and raise awareness of the importance of STEM, 2) connect individuals and organizations with resources and each other, and 3) coordinate activities and partnerships that increase the awareness and availability of STEM education opportunities. This paper will provide an overview of the future outlook for the STEM workforce that highlights the compelling need for STEM initiatives to address the projected shortages (Bayer Corporation, 2014; Morones, 2013). The paper will describe the vision and governing model of the CFSEC and how it can serve as a model that other regions and states can adopt and tailor to implement a collaborative STEM community. Finally, the paper will conclude with the challenges encountered in establishing a CFSEC-like organization as well as best practices and lessons learned. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 71 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MODELING AND SIMULATION PROFESSIONALS – MEETING THE DEMAND 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15342 Lisa Jean Bair SAIC Norfolk, VA James J. Jackson SAIC Virginia Beach, VA The development and appropriate use of modeling and simulation (M&S) technology relies on professionals with a skill sets that run the gamut from computational science, software engineering, and analysis to domain knowledge found in instructional design, physics, engineering, health sciences, military sciences and more. To support the needs for developing the skilled workforce required to grow the M&S industry, which provides well-paying jobs and bolsters the economy, universities have developed curricula, certificate, and degree programs to meet this niche. However, fulfilling these M&S skill sets is not the exclusive domain of M&S programs. Furthermore, time constraints may require specialization among the many M&S-related topics for a Certified Modeling and Simulation Professional (CMSP). It may not be possible for a new graduate to develop proficiency sufficient to meet workforce demands. This paper builds upon earlier work surveying Domains, Skills, Knowledge, and Applications of the M&S Professional. Assuming the stated restrictions exist, we survey professionals, program managers, and academics and examine areas of emphasis in the various M&S programs available. We evaluate the degree to which M&S specific programs are able to meet industry demands and assess whether those demands are being met by M&S graduates or graduates with other specialties. We end with observations about the M&S workforce with recommendations for the M&S Community at large. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F P-4 Getting Your Money’s Worth 1400 Calculating Simulation-Based Training Value: Cost Avoidance and Proficiency (15199) 1430 Large Scale Adoption of Training Simulations: Are We There Yet? (15256) 1500 Automated Surveys: Lowering the Respondent’s Burden (15080) Notes 72 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts CALCULATING SIMULATION-BASED TRAINING VALUE: COST AVOIDANCE AND PROFICIENCY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15199 Dr. Tim Cooley DynamX Consulting Castle Rock, CO Mr. Greg Seavers, Mr John Roth & Mr. Jose Rodriguez USMC/PM-TRASYS Orlando, FL Dr. Steven Gordon Georgia Tech Research Institute Orlando, FL For over a decade, leaders in the Department of Defense (DoD) have asked “What is the value of simulation based training?” or “Why should I spend one more dollar on simulation?”. The easiest answer may be the qualitative benefits of simulation that pertain to areas like safety, availability, flexibility in scenarios, and protection of operational plans. But leaders want quantitative measures such as Return on Investment (ROI), and ROI for simulation has two major facets: cost and benefit (often called results). The authors’ research has focused on answering the DoD questions with cost avoidance computations because cost avoidance is a key component of ROI calculations, and with proficiency improvement evaluations to determine if use of simulation has a quantitative benefit. The authors will present their methods of calculating cost avoidance over the last four years for many simulation-based training systems managed by the United States Marine Corps Program Manager for Training Systems (PM-TRASYS). The research has shown cost avoidance of over $2B across the PM-TRASYS systems analyzed, but the authors are also developing methods to refine these measures of cost avoidance. These more realistic measures are linked to live training requirements allowed to be conducted in simulation and/or to proficiency increases due to use of simulation. These same cost avoidance methods are now being applied to large scale exercises to show the value of using a mix of live-virtual-constructive systems in these scenarios. This paper will also discuss the management data that is gathered and depicted as part of the cost avoidance studies. This data captures use statistics by system and site, and includes data such as the number of Marines trained and munitions used. As will be shown in the paper, this study provides quantitative measures of simulation cost avoidance and results. LARGE SCALE ADOPTION OF TRAINING SIMULATIONS: ARE WE THERE YET? 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15256 Dr. Amela Sadagic Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, CA Maj Floy A. Yates Jr. MAGTFTC Battle Simulation Center, USMC Twentynine Palms, CA Computer-supported training simulations have been recognized for the potential and the benefits they have in supplementing the training needs of the military, yet we still do not see evidence of large-scale deployment and adoption of these systems by users in this domain. The current challenging budgetary situation suggests that the Return on Investment (ROI) will be more scrutinized than ever before, forcing communities to abandon underutilized and underperformed Modeling and Simulation (M&S) solutions. Such developments are also likely to affect global decisions related to future investments in these types of technologies. This paper presents the design and results of a study that included collection of comprehensive data on the adoption and use of training simulations in the military domain. The analysis of this data set suggests that the reasons for low use of simulations had little to do with the overall quality of hardware and software (although they were mentioned as factors), and that a myriad of other factors were found to influence the outcome to a greater extent. The understandings collected in this and other studies all attest that military training is a complex, multilayered domain that is only partially defined by the type and technical characteristics of systems being used to achieve that goal. Our work and experience in this domain give us a firm basis to hypothesize that a well selected set of strategic approaches could bring much greater results in this domain, even with a modest investment made to support that change. The findings and recommendations are highly applicable to all DoD services and other communities that plan to use these types or solutions in their training and learning practices. The study also offers a contribution towards a better understanding of general diffusion and adoption of other technical innovations in the military domain. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 73 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts AUTOMATED SURVEYS: LOWERING THE RESPONDENT’S BURDEN 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15080 Richard Kist MSc., Igor Franken MSc. National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) Amsterdam, The Netherlands Measuring effectiveness and the operational utility of new techniques, technologies and training through feedback of the Warfighter is critical. Paper questionnaires and interviews have merits. However, offering a relevant, compact questionnaire after each mission to test and exercise participants with different roles and backgrounds can be made more efficient with an automated survey. This paper discusses the challenges faced in survey data collection in an operationally realistic environment, and lessons learned during years of survey data collection. During the Bold Quest cycle, a survey effort was set up using such an automated tool (Questionnaire for Utility Evaluation and Survey Tool, QUEST). The concept of employment for automated surveys described here addresses many of the concerns associated with webbased surveying techniques (Sills & Song, 2002). Use of clear and concise questions and other measures lowering the burden for the respondents yield the best results from a survey effort. An automated tool ideally should work locally on any laptop or handheld device, as well as in networked conditions. It should be tailored to military environments, offering questionnaires for all phases (pre/post exercise, daily post mission). By tooling the questions to reduce burden, analyzing the language used, and taking steps to assure the relevance of the questions to each participants, more efficient data collection can occur – the kind of data collection which provides 100,000s of survey responses helping to determine the effectiveness of new military developments. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F P-5 Cybersecurity: New Threats, New Policies, New Solutions 1600 Risk Management Framework (RMF) Transition Impacts in Training Simulation Systems (15009) 1630 Cybersecurity Controls: Then and Now (15010) 1700 Cybersecurity Challenges and Resolutions for Simulator & Training Systems (15063) NOTES 74 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (RMF) TRANSITION IMPACTS IN TRAINING SIMULATION SYSTEMS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15009 Graham Fleener & Marco Mayor U.S. Army PEO STRI Orlando, FL Dr. Cliff Zou University of Central Florida Orlando, FL The Department of Defense (DOD) Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP) is undergoing its first transition and update since 2007. The new process is titled Risk Management Framework (RMF) and there are significant changes in the new guidance. Given the transition there are a number of implications for the training and simulation community for ensuring training systems maintain both their certification and their information security posture. Guidance for the transition has been evolving slowly with each the agencies initiating RMF implementation individually. The Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) follows Army guidance for the transition. This paper will define the formal requirements, new terminology, and discuss how the RMF risk assessment is determined. Additionally, we will capture the transition and migration of how PEO STRI will implement the Risk Management Framework. This paper will describe the tools that support the RMF implementation, such as the Knowledge Service (KS) and the Enterprise Mission Assurance Support Service (eMASS). We will describe the transition impacts for PEO STRI stakeholders such as contractors doing business with PEO STRI, system users, and Project Managers (PM). Each of the stakeholders will have unique concerns, impacts, and questions during the transition. There will be a number of challenges associated with transitioning to a new process that will be discussed. To conclude, we’ll provide guidelines to help the training and simulation community make the transition to RMF. CYBERSECURITY CONTROLS: THEN AND NOW 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15010 Marco Mayor U.S. Army PEO STRI Orlando, FL The phase out of the Department of Defense (DOD) Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP) is leading to a new process called Risk Management Framework (RMF). This new process was mandated by DOD Instruction 8500.01, which also mandated the adoption of the term “cybersecurity” to be used throughout DOD instead of the term “information assurance (IA).” RMF will follow a set of security controls inherited from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). These controls are specifically located in the Special Publication (SP) 800-53. The NIST SP 800-53 controls will replace the existing DOD Instruction (DODI) 8500.2 controls and have been updated to reflect the evolving technologies while addressing new cybersecurity threats. Given the transition, there are a number of implications for the training and simulation community for ensuring training systems comply with these new controls and maintain their information security posture. Guidance for the transition has been developing gradually and each of the DOD agencies are handling it individually at the implementation level. The Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) is following DOD and specifically Army guidance to ensure the NIST control implementation gets executed in the most efficient manner possible. This paper will first provide some background on the legacy DOD 8500.2 controls and an overview of the transition to the NIST SP 800-53 controls. It will then discuss the formal requirements, new terminology, implementation and guidance driving this transition. This paper will analyze the framework of the NIST SP 80053 RMF controls and how they compare to DIACAP controls. It will discuss the security control overlays, and the assessment procedures. To conclude, this paper will describe the transition impacts for PEO STRI stakeholders, which include DOD contractors, system users, and Project Managers (PM). This paper will layout the fundamental idea and challenges PEO STRI faced on a particular use case, while handling the transition from the DODI 8500.2 DIACAP controls to the NIST SP 800-53 RMF controls. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 75 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts CYBERSECURITY CHALLENGES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR SIMULATOR & TRAINING SYSTEMS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15063 Douglas E. Wedel Defense Security Service, IOFND Beavercreek, OH Dr. Ilya Lipkin USAF AFMC AFLCMC/WING Wright-Patterson AFB, OH Lt. Luis Cintron USAF AFMC AFLCMC/WNSEB Wright-Patterson AFB, OH Cybersecurity (CS) requirements and considerations have increasingly been impacting special-purpose systems with embedded Information Technology (IT) such as simulator and training systems in recent years. This is primarily driven by increased insider threats, proliferation of network interconnections, and the rise of mobile computing (smartphones/tablets) as well as increased capabilities of nation states, organized crime, and political activists to gather and exploit information about current capabilities. In the past CS measures have been applied through either Risk Avoidance “shutting down a capability until the risk is eliminated” or Risk Ignorance, “operating a system without regard to the risk because of a perceived functional or operational need”. However, through the use of Risk Management, CS can balance these two areas by assuring the mission and protecting the systems, networks and information by properly categorizing the system and the information through a risk based assessment process. To avoid mission impact previous policy was compliance based and risk was typically avoided or waived rather than mitigated. The DoD Risk Management Framework (RMF) (DoDI 8500.01, 2014) seeks to address the shortfalls that compliance management imposed on systems. However, a clear understanding of how to apply risk is needed to provide a balanced approach to CS. To support CS requirements this paper will present an approach for assessing risk to simulator and training systems and outline the steps necessary to overcome and mitigate said issues through a process that focuses on applicability, compliance, mitigation, and reduction of impact. This paper is not a description of the DoD RMF, but seeks to provide a process to assess CS requirements by addressing the “Spirit and Intent” of the CS requirement, its applicability, probability, and impact of applying or not applying that requirement, and identifying solutions that resolve the finding or reduces the impact to an acceptable level for authorization. This paper will strive to provide a practical approach to assessing system risk by providing initial framework examples that will demonstrate its applicability to manage new technology insertions, network connectivity, existing program limitations and mobile computing impacts to existing simulator and training systems. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-1 Cutting Edge Training 1400 Mobile Augmented Reality for Force-on-Force Training (15223) 1430 Emergency Medical Card Augmented Reality: Training Evaluation (15266) 1500 Real-Time Cutting of Organs with Scissors (15333) Notes 76 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MOBILE AUGMENTED REALITY FOR FORCE-ON-FORCE TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15223 Richard Schaffer, Sean Cullen, Laura Cerritelli Rakesh Kumar, Supun Samarasekera, Mikhail Lockheed Martin Sizintsev, Taragay Oskiper, Vlad Branzoi Burlington, Massachusetts SRI International Princeton, NJ Live field training against a thinking human opposing force – force-on-force training – is highly valued by commanders. However, a limitation of current force-on-force training is the lack of battlefield effects, such as mortar or artillery detonations. This prevents fully employing indirect fires as part of combined arms operations in these exercises. In particular, forward observers have no means to adjust fire if they cannot observe impacts. We describe the development of a prototype system that provides mobile forward observers the visual feedback they need to conduct these operations. The key emerging innovative technology that enables this training is precision mobile augmented reality. Augmented reality inserts virtual elements into views of real environments. In this application, a forward observer’s position and look direction must be precisely tracked in real-time in order for battlefield effects to appear stably in the correct location. This precision must be maintained as the observer moves between positions. In addition, the effects must be rendered realistically, so they appear to be part of the environment and reflect local conditions, including wind and obscuration by terrain. Forward observers routinely use binoculars to locate targets and adjust fire. Consequently, augmented reality capable binoculars are also required for this task. As an additional challenge, the tracking and rendering for both naked eye and binocular views must be performed on a small, lightweight, body-worn computer compatible with field use. Finally, the system must integrate with an existing LT2 force-on-force training system. This paper describes the key advances needed to produce the prototype system. We focus in particular on the challenges of extending an earlier prototype designed for use only from fixed positions and not connected to any live training system. The results of initial demonstrations at MCB Quantico are also presented. USING AUGMENTED REALITY TO TRAIN COMBAT MEDICS: AN EVALUATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15266 Christina N. Lacerenza, C. Shawn Burke, David S. Metcalf, Shannon L. Marlow, Luke Read University of Central Florida, IST Orlando, FL Christine Allen, Mark Mazzeo ARL-HRED STTC Orlando, FL This study aims to evaluate the training effectiveness of the augmented reality enabled version of the Combat Medic cards and to assist the Army in determining future development and implementation plans for augmented reality (AR) training in conjunction with the Emergency Medical Care cards or other similar training products. The University of Central Florida’s Institute for Simulation and Training (UCF IST) has previously developed emergency medical training cards in an effort to design effective simulation for Army medics. Additionally, two digital supplementary versions of the cards were developed: an online Flash version and an iOS mobile eversion supporting flash card study and self-assessment with integration of study scheduling to assist with scheduling of material for transfer into long-term memory. Moreover, an augmented reality solution for the Combat Medic card deck, which will launch videos of procedures after the user scans the card was developed, with an existing third-party augmented reality toolkit that uses image recognition as a trigger. The evaluation compares learning, speed of learning, usability, perceived utility, level of engagement, and perceived speed of access to information between the augmented reality enabled Combat Medic cards and the Combat Medic app. The evaluation should provide a validated methodology for integrating AR into existing training print and/or digital training materials which can: 1) serve to expand the toolkit for Army instructional designers and trainers and 2) facilitate and continue to improve an active learning process already under development which has been well received and has already demonstrated training utility on a small scale. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 77 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts REAL-TIME CUTTING OF ORGANS WITH SCISSORS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15333 Matthew Hackett, Kevin Fefferman ARL HRED-STTC Orlando, FL Steve McIlwain, Bradley Willson Applied Research Associates, Inc. Raleigh, NC The ability to perform random cuts to organs in real-time is crucial in a virtual reality based surgical simulator. Nowadays, organs are commonly simulated using the Finite Element Method (FEM) on tetrahedral meshes. In many cases, cuts can be approximated as singular sections. Thus, the method presented in this paper was designed to perform subdivisions of tetrahedrons accurately along the path of the blades following a set of pre-computed patterns. To ensure the resulting meshes remain suitable for simulation, the subdivisions are performed in such a way that adjacent tetrahedrons will weld and not overlap. Care is taken to minimize the subdivision of tetrahedrons in the instances where blades traverse the mesh along the boundaries of elements, in which case application of the basic patterns would have generated degenerated tetrahedrons. This paper also describes the way in which the surface mesh is extracted from the tetrahedral mesh after the cut is performed, in order to update the data for collision management and visualization. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-2 Getting to the Right Scenarios & Data 1600 Virtual Battlespace Scenario Encoding for Reuse (15027) 1630 Multi-Federate Scenario Development and Testing: “A Good Plan, Violently Executed” (15249) 1700 The Expected Results Method for Data Verification (15020) Notes 78 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts SIMULATION SCENARIO ENCODING FOR REUSE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15027 Captain Michael J. Eady, USMC Marine Corps Training and Education Command Quantico, Virginia Lieutenant Colonel David W. Parkes, USA Joint Staff J7 Suffolk, Virginia The United States Army and United States Marine Corps employ the Virtual Battlespace 3 (VBS3) commercial game for first-person small-unit training and have invested significantly in training scenarios constructed using proprietary tools and data formats. Open standards data structures need to be utilized in order to move toward improved interoperability, address the statutory intent for open competition and affordability, and protect investments made in models, terrain, and other elements of scenarios that are separate and distinct from the game engine source coding. Expanding capabilities for open scenario interchange will improve scenario reuse while creating greater opportunities for simulation data interchange and open competition for future virtual training capabilities. This paper describes and demonstrates initial application of Extensible Markup Language (XML) technologies to represent and interchange simulation scenario data. Design of XML data structures to capture a subset of a VBS2 scenario’s data content is successfully demonstrated, and the capability to transform content from the XML model back to the VBS2 scenario data formats utilizing an Extensible Stylesheet Language Transformation (XSLT) document is discussed. Proposed extensions to existing and developing simulation standards are made in order to accommodate the set of data used in VBS2 scenarios. The research provides a foundation for future efforts to determine the feasibility of creating an open XML schema that addresses all critical aspects of a simulation scenario, which will enable open competition for the first-person “games for training” requirement while preserving investments in proprietary data structures. MULTI-FEDERATE SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING: “A GOOD PLAN, VIOLENTLY EXECUTED” 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15249 Donald C. Meinshausen ARCIC / JAMSD / Lockheed Martin Ft Eustis, VA Mitchell Faircloth MCoE / MBL / EEB / SAIC Ft Benning, GA The Battle Lab Collaborative Simulation Environment (BLCSE) annually hosts a variety of multi-federate, entity based, advanced concepts and systems simulation experiments. Technical challenges, evolving scenarios, changing requirements and even good ideas, often create moving targets for scenario developers preparing for the events. Challenges and opportunities include: structural division, replication and distribution; automation, referential integrity, nomenclature, command and control, assignment, attrition and lay down, composition/behavioral impact analysis, configuration management, semantic mapping, operator/player usability and division of labor. As collaborating members within the BLCSE Community of Practice, the Maneuver Battle Lab (MBL) and the Joint and Army Models and Simulations Division (JAMSD) are forging methods and employing a variety of tools, including the BLCSE ForceBuilder, to accelerate the development, quality and testing of a variety of formats for scenario and supporting deliverables. This paper describes the rapid construction, adaptation and testing of futuristic task organizations from the basic Table of Organization and Equipment (TO&E) to the networked, human-in-loop, real-time, 60,000-entity war game. Lessons learned and innovations, including a new ten stage ORBAT development process and our initial utilization of tools such as the Web-based Military Scenario Development Environment (WebMSDE), in preparation for BLCSE simulation exercises for 2014 and 2015, will be covered in detail. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 79 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THE EXPECTED RESULTS METHOD FOR DATA VERIFICATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15020 Paul Monday Lockheed Martin Radcliff, KY The credibility of US Army analytical experiments using distributed simulation depends on the quality of the simulation, the pedigree of the input data, and the appropriateness of the simulation system to the problem. The second of these factors is best met by using classified performance data from the Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA) for essential battlefield behaviors, like sensors, weapon fire, and damage assessment. Until recently, using classified data has been a time-consuming and expensive endeavor: it requires significant technical expertise to load, and it is difficult to verify that it works correctly. Fortunately, new capabilities, tools, and processes are available that greatly reduce these costs. This paper will discuss these developments, a new method to verify that all of the components are configured and operate properly, and the application to recent Army Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC) experiments. Three recent developments have focused improving the process to load the data. OneSAF has redesigned their input data file formats and structures so that they correspond exactly with the Standard File Format (SFF) defined by AMSAA, ARCIC developed a library of supporting configurations that correlate directly to the AMSAA nomenclature, and the Entity Validation Tool was designed to quickly execute the essential models with a test-jig approach to identify problems with the loaded data. The missing part of the process is provided by the new Expected Results Method. Instead of the usual subjective assessment of quality, e.g., “It looks about right to me”, this new approach compares the performance of a combat model with authoritative expectations to quickly verify that the model, data, and simulation are all working correctly. Integrated together, these developments now make it possible to use AMSAA classified performance data with minimal time and maximum assurance that the experiment's analytical results will be of the highest quality possible. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-3 Convergence of Testing & Training 0830 Polygone LVC: The New Paradigm for EW Training (15213) 0900 Live Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Infrastructure Architecture (LS TTE IA) Prototype (15099) 0930 Measuring Realism in Simulations for Training and Testing (15206) Notes 80 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts POLYGONE LVC: THE NEW PARADIGM FOR EW TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15213 Lt Col Scott Case Ryan McLaughlin United States Air Force Northrop Grumman Warrior Preparation Center Detachment 3 Germany Orlando, FL By the end of 2015, the Multinational Aircrew Electronic Warfare Tactics Facility (MAEWTF) known as Polygone range, based on a tri-national agreement between France, Germany, and the United States will establish itself as a world-class Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) training range. Through working together with German Air Force Command, French Air Force Command, United States Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa (USAFE-AFAFRICA), and several LVC industry leaders, Polygone will offer a first-of-kind capability that promises to usher a new paradigm of Electronic Warfare (EW) training. The initial operational capability reuses or repurposes existing Polygone range infrastructure while leveraging innovations made by other ranges, particularly the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex (JPARC). By avoiding a "home grown" approach, Polygone managed to save approximately $300 million in acquisition costs and yield a similar training capability. The baseline of the Polygone LVC project, also known as Multinational Aviation LVC Training System (MALTS), provides a mobile LVC range capable of bringing advanced EW training to major exercises worldwide. The initial phase included developing innovative virtual surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) leveraging the expertise of professional German Air Force live SAM operators, improving training capabilities for future Special Operations Forces (SOF) and Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) mission readiness training, and establishing the framework required for a worldwide distributed training audience. The lack of modern advanced SAM training assets, increasingly prohibitive live training restrictions, and alarming increases in potential adversary air defense capabilities have led to the Polygone's development of virtual SAMs. These virtual SAM operator stations enable trained threat operators to utilize modern and advanced SAM techniques at virtual single and double digit SAM stations providing affects to live aircraft flying training missions at Polygone. This paper will discuss the MALTS LVC project, development of virtual SAMs for EW training, and how Polygone leveraged JPARC LVC innovations to advance Coalition training in Europe. LIVE SYNTHETIC TRAINING AND TEST & EVALUATION INFRASTRUCTURE ARCHITECTURE (LS TTE IA) PROTOTYPE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15099 Paul Dumanoir, Mike Willoughby U.S. Army PEO STRI Orlando, FL Burt Grippin, Richard Crutchfield, Rob Wittman & Sean Barie MITRE Corporation Orlando, FL This paper describes the Live Synthetic Training and Test & Evaluation Infrastructure Architecture (LS TTE IA) prototype. The LS TTE IA was funded by PEO STRI and AMSO in FY14 with the intent of providing a technology insertion into LVC-IA, replacing the existing infrastructure with a cloud-enabled service-oriented architecture (SOA). This SOA infrastructure is being developed with the expressed goal of supporting both the Training domain and the Test & Evaluation community. It will be compliant with the Common Operating Environment (COE) and suitable for hosting within the COE Data Center/Cloud Computing Environment. The prototype architecture was developed in collaboration with Johns Hopkins University’s LS TTE Enterprise Architecture (LS TTE EA) research which explored the business case and governance strategy for managing a SOA environment. The LS TTE EA is described, as well as the relationship of the LS TTE IA to the reference architecture of the LS TTE EA. This paper explains the SOA prototype layered architecture, and the initial services developed in FY14. Two concurrent projects under development in FY14 developed services that operate on the LS TTE IA infrastructure. This paper will briefly discuss those projects and their successful use of the infrastructure. Finally, the paper will discuss the planned FY15 infrastructure improvements and the forward looking implementation strategy. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 81 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MEASURING REALISM IN SIMULATIONS FOR TRAINING AND TESTING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15206 Jerrit Askvig, Phil Hallenbeck The MITRE Corporation McLean, Virginia Many publications and presentations on training or testing mention the need for “realism,” or the responsibility of trainers or developers to provide a “realistic training environment” or “a realistic simulation.” Yet, none appear to define realism or describe how it might be judged such that choices could be made among competing investments, or the realism of a given simulation environment improved. We present here a doctrine-based model to rigorously and repeatably assess the realism of a simulation environment. It provides a framework to reason about, assess, and communicate realism for tasks and systems spanning all the Army’s Warfighting Functions; and a software application to repeatably yet quickly and easily assess the specific components of realism as they impact specific tasks or systems. The model is based on the Army’s Mission Variables of METT-TC (Mission, Enemy, Terrain, Troops, Time, and Civil considerations), plus the Immersive environment (the visual, aural, and other factors that lead a participant to believe that he or she is in a “real” environment and should behave accordingly). Framing the assessment in terms of Army risk management doctrine (where both the likelihood and the severity of hazards are considered) leads to the straightforward concept of assessing risks to realism in terms of “METT-TC+I.” The model decomposes the Enemy (E) and Troops (T) variables into fine-grained capabilities suitable for assessment; and each of the other variables (mission, terrain, and so forth) into factors (such as weapon lethality, or visual indications of weapons fire) that may impact capability achievement and therefore event outcome. Each capability’s and factor’s risk to realism is calculated based on its probable impact, and the likelihood it would be inadequately simulated. Users of the software application may easily modify these calculations or their results to reflect risk mitigation steps, or the expert judgment of the user. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-4 From Reality to Simulation 1030 Network Bandwidth’s Effect on Virtual World Simulator Performance Optimization (15360) 1100 3D Immersive Environment Using X-Plane for Depth Perception Research (15261) 1130 Battle Damage Computation Server (15051) Notes 82 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts NETWORK BANDWIDTH'S EFFECT ON VIRTUAL WORLD SIMULATOR PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15360 Sean C. Mondesire U.S. Army Research Laboratory Orlando, FL Jonathan Stevens University of Central Florida Orlando, FL Douglas B. Maxwell U.S. Army Research Laboratory Orlando, FL The United States Department of Defense (DoD) employs virtual and game-based training simulators to train its servicemembers on both individual and collective cognitive and psychomotor tasks. The current employment of these training simulators is typically conducted in a stand-alone manner, with distributed simulation remaining the exception due to interoperability challenges. The OpenSimulator (OpenSim) is a popular open-sourced virtual world simulator that currently provides a persistent three-dimensional social community for its users. Under the Army Research Laboratory's (ARL) Military OpenSimulator Enterprise Strategy (MOSES) research program, OpenSim is being developed to serve as a prototypical distributed military virtual training environment for tactical operations. Virtual worlds for military training is an emerging domain. As such, detailed analysis of critical architecture parameters is required in order to optimize the performance of both the simulator's servers as well as the multitude of client connections. Unfortunately, due to a lack of extensive virtual world performance analysis, OpenSim server administrators often make arbitrary resource allocations to support their environments and training scenarios. Negative consequences to this approach are that typically too few resources are allocated to an overwhelmed server, resulting in an unresponsive environment, while too many resources are allocated to an underutilized server, when those resources could be more effectively applied elsewhere. In this paper, we analyze network bandwidth's effect on virtual world simulator performance so as to support the future creation of a predictive model that will determine the optimal amount of resources required to support a target number of concurrent users in the virtual world. This analysis, and the future development of our predictive model, will provide the OpenSim developer community with the knowledge required to best allocate resources to support expected server load. 3D IMMERSIVE ENVIRONMENT USING X-PLANE FOR DEPTH PERCEPTION RESEARCH 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15261 Dr. Logan A.Williams, Charles T. Bullock, Dr. Marc D. Winterbottom, Dr. James P. Gaska, Dr. Steven C. Hadley 711th Human Performance Wing, United States Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine Wright-Patterson AFB, OH Dr. Charles J. Lloyd Visual Performance LLC Ellisville, MO Dr. Michael P. Browne SA Photonics Los Gatos, CA Game-based flight simulation software has been shown to provide a reliable, low-cost, virtual environment able to facilitate a wide range of training and research objectives. In this work, which is part of the U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine Operational Based Vision Assessment program, game-based simulation software was used to render an immersive three-dimensional constructive environment within a helmet mounted display (HMD) for weapons platform specific vision research and to quantify the impact of aircrew vision on selected operational tasks. In this work, an operationally relevant MH-60 call-tolanding task was simulated to provide data relevant to the applicability of U.S. Air Force Flying Class III depth perception standards. The specific simulation system consisted of a high-resolution (1920x1200) 55° field-of-view binocular HMD with infrared head tracking, in which two instances of X-Plane were stereoscopically rendered to the HMD using separate PCs, both incorporating Intel i7 processors and Quadro K4200 video cards with Quadro Sync. This paper details the overall design, implementation, and validation of the virtual environment used to simulate the MH-60 call-to-landing task, including stereoscopic rendering using game-based simulation software, hardware/software stereo rendering limitations, HMD warping, and head-tracker integration. The minimum perceived stereo threshold capabilities of this system are also quantified, including discussion of its applicability to simulated tasks requiring precise depth discrimination. This work will provide an example simulation framework for future stereoscopic virtual immersive environments applicable to both research and training. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 83 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts BATTLE DAMAGE COMPUTATION SERVER 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15051 Hung Tran Tactical Systems, CAE USA Tampa, FL This paper will present a new approach for handling the battle lethality computation in the context of a Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) network training scenario where participants in an exercise are required to broadcast their current damage status. Usually, each simulation handles the computation and the assessment of damage differently, resulting in an “unfair fight” between the participants. Rather than having each simulation performs this computation, an alternate approach would be to delegate the lethality computation to a common processing task implemented on a server. The design of the battle damage server will be described and discussed in this paper. The advantage of the battle damage computation approach described in this paper is twofold: participants within the network would use a common mathematical model, and simulations being freed from the burden to compute the battle lethality. This approach will help to eliminate the interoperability variances in lethality results and achieve a “fair fight” weapon effect. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-5 Innovation in Environmental Modeling 1400 High Fidelity Wind Model Software for Real-Time Simulation Platforms (15362) 1430 Automated Runtime Terrain Database Correlation Assessment (15218) 1500 Automated Modelization in Terrain Database Production (15290) Notes 84 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts HIGH FIDELITY WIND MODEL SOFTWARE FOR REAL-TIME SIMULATION PLATFORMS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15362 Jaime Sanchez, Dr. Juan Pelaez SimSpace Ingenieria S.L. Madrid, Spain Atmospheric conditions can be a threat to flight safety. Specifically, wind conditions can be particularly critical in ground-proximity, low altitude operations or flying near aerodynamic wakes. Since flight simulation is intended to train pilots in the most difficult flight situations under the most extreme conditions it is necessary to include a detail wind model as part of the flight simulator, allowing pilots to train safely in complex operation procedures in a cost-effective manner. This paper presents a methodology for modeling detail physics based winds in real-time. The method is designed to be flexible and can simulate wind conditions in different types of environments such as large mountainous landscapes, urban areas, offshore oil rigs or aerodynamic wakes of moving ships and airplanes. The methodology presented consists of three steps. First, given a particular environment and after its geometry is defined, the winds are computed using a mesh-free Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) solver, very adequate for complex geometries and quick turnaround times, which models turbulence using Large Eddie Simulation (LES), very appropriate for highly separated flows. In each environment multiple CFD computations are required for different wind conditions (i.e. wind directions and speeds) in order to characterize the real-time operating conditions. Second, the resulting CFD solutions are compressed and optimized. Third, the post process optimized databases are used by a software module which generates steady and turbulent wind vectors in realtime. The method’s flexibility to simulate wind conditions in different environments will be presented through different case studies: aerodynamic winds due to a simplified building structure, low level wind shear and turbulent effects in Gibraltar airport, aerodynamic wakes of moving a transport airplane and a ship frigate. Finally, the effect of the detail wind model in a helicopter pilot’s workload operating near a ship will be presented. AUTOMATED RUNTIME TERRAIN DATABASE CORRELATION ASSESSMENT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15218 Jeremy P. Joseph, MS, CMSP, Andrew Tosh, MBA GameSim Inc Orlando, FL Benito Graniela, PhD Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD), Orlando, FL As the US Navy and US Marine Corps move toward integrating existing flight simulators into common training environments, the importance of having a correlated, correct environmental representation is vital for achieving a fair fight and a high training value to the warfighter. Many of these simulators are operating off different versions of source data and using different image generator (IG) vendors, which can result in interoperability problems. Although correlation between visual terrain databases and simulation terrain databases have been investigated in the past, there is a lack of research on correlation between large synthetic environments using runtime visual and sensor databases in Navy and Marine Corps flight simulators. Many current practices involve manual inspection and limited area of interest (AOI) testing to determine correlation, resulting in ineffective correlation assessments, which may cause negative training. In an effort to address this gap, preliminary research has been conducted to develop a tool that can perform automated correlation and integrity assessments on runtime formats, including visual and sensor databases, using standard interfaces such as the Common IG Interface (CIGI) within a distributed simulation environment. Utilizing these standard interfaces along with standard data formats, such as the U.S. Navy Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Portable Source Initiative (NPSI), the research framework facilitates tests to identify integrity and correlation conditions that may negatively affect training. The details of the investigation, its outcomes, and future research are reported. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 85 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts AUTOMATED MODELIZATION IN TERRAIN DATABASE PRODUCTION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15290 Stephen Eckman GameSim Orlando, FL Ronald Moore Leidos Orlando, FL Mark Johnson U.S Army PEOSTRI Orlando, FL Jaeson Munro PAI Orlando, FL The feature content requirements for terrain databases used in the Modeling and Simulation industry continue to grow. The requested database geographic extents are expanding. Database feature densities and complexities are increasing. New simulation systems are leveraging game engines, enabling this growth in database content requirements. Unfortunately, the cost of producing 3D cultural models, that reflect these increased complexities, using traditional commercial 3D modeling tools, by hand, is quickly becoming unsustainable, and maintaining and updating 3D cultural models libraries are becoming unaffordable. The process of assigning 3D model references to vector features in a geospatial database, identified as modelization, has been automated by the SE Core program to significantly reduce database production costs, improve database quality and consistency and increase run-time database performance. This paper describes the processes and tools used in the Automated Modelization Process in the production of the Synthetic Environment Core (SE Core) terrain databases. When applied, these tools and processes results in a cost effective approach to automatically generate 3D cultural models that are designed for the specified run-time requirements, saving considerable development time when compared to using commercial 3D modeling tools and manual processes. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320C S-6 Human Interface to Artificial Intelligence 1400 Modeling CGF Behavior with Machine Learning Techniques: Requirements and Future Directions (15128) 1430 Automatic Speech Recognition in Training Systems: Misconceptions, Challenges and Paths Forward (15205) 1500 On the Peripheral Application of Head Mounted Display (HMD) Devices in Infantry Simulation (15186) Notes 86 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MODELING CGF BEHAVIOR WITH MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES: REQUIREMENTS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15128 Armon Toubman, Gerald Poppinga, Jan Joris Roessingh National Aerospace Laboratory NLR Amsterdam, Netherlands Rikke Amilde Løvlid Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI) Kjeller, Norway Ming Hou Defense Research and Development Canada Toronto, Canada Christophe Meyer Thales Palaiseau, France Linus Luotsinen Swedish Defence Research Agency FOI Stockholm, Sweden Roel Rijken Dutch Ministry of Defence Utrecht, Netherlands Michal Turčaník Armed Forces Academy Liptovský Mikuláš, Slovakia Commercial/Military-Off-The-Shelf (COTS/MOTS) Computer Generated Forces (CGF) packages are widely used in modelling and simulation for training purposes. Conventional CGF packages often include artificial intelligence (AI) interfaces, with which the end user defines CGF behaviors. We believe Machine Learning (ML) techniques can be beneficial to the behavior modelling process, yet such techniques seem to be underused and perhaps underappreciated. This paper aims at bridging the gap between users in academia and the military/industry at a high level when it comes to ML and AI. Also, specific user requirements and how they can be addressed by ML techniques are highlighted with the focus on the added ML value to CGF packages. The paper is based on the work of the NATO Research Task Group IST-121 RTG-060 ‘Machine Learning Techniques for Autonomous Computer Generated Entities’. AUTOMATIC SPEECH RECOGNITION IN TRAINING SYSTEMS: MISCONCEPTIONS, CHALLENGES AND PATHS FORWARD 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15205 Brian Stensrud, Charles Newton Soar Technology, Inc. Orlando, FL Beth Atkinson, John Killilea NAWCTSD Orlando, FL Over the past decade, we have seen moderate demand for simulation-based training systems to include automatic speech recognition (ASR). Like commercially available services such as Apple's Siri and Google Now, ASR gives training systems the capability to interpret human speech and react to that speech with appropriate actions (e.g. executing a spoken command) and responses (e.g. replying to a human with confirmation or requests for clarification). Introduction of this capability is designed to address instructormanning limitations and improve the fidelity of the training experience. However, ASR successes within simulation-based training systems have been modest, historically. We contend that this lack of widespread usage and success stems primarily from a fundamental misunderstanding of (and thus lack of investment in) the components necessary to achieve more effective ASR. In this paper, we describe the essential functions of ASR: (1) Recognition is when the audio of the spoken utterance is translated into text. (2) Understanding attempts to glean meaning from the text – whether they denote, for example, a new directive, a response to a previous query, or a request for new information. (3) Behavior refers to the functions the system is responsible for after receiving a recognized speech utterance. (4) Some training systems also employ dialogue when continuous interaction with humans is required. Finally, we outline current ASR research and development, discuss typical implementations, and introduce potential strategies to improve specific ASR functions and the capability as a whole to provide better support for future training systems. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 87 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ON THE PERIPHERAL APPLICATION OF HMD DEVICES IN INFANTRY SIMULATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15186 Tomer J. Michael IDF GFC Battle-Lab Tel-Aviv, Israel Yaniv Minkov IDF GFC COR Tel-Aviv, Israel The purpose of this paper is to present the results of an attempt carried out at the IDF Ground Forces Command Battle-Lab to integrate a Head Mounted Display (HMD) device as part of a peripheralequipment simulator for infantry. The Battle-Lab is a research oriented simulation environment, where combat scenarios with many multiple human participants can be run to examine the effects novel concepts or technologies could have on scenario outcomes. Previously (Michael et. Al, 2014) an attempt was made at the Lab to evaluate an HMD’s effectiveness as an exclusive display for infantry simulation. At that time, while the device tested was found to have had a positive impact on a participant’s motivation and spatial awareness, it was found lacking in the field of visual fidelity, as well as responsible for an increased incidence of simulation sickness among its wearers. As a result of the previous evaluation it was decided to proceed with the integration of the device, but only in supplementary peripheral simulators. These included a pair of binoculars made available to an infantry soldier for use concurrently with a standard flat-screen first-person infantry simulation. However, given the device’s reputation for causing simulation sickness, and our previous experience with the phenomena, it was decided to monitor the participants’ experience closely. This task was accomplished through simple after-action self-review supplemented by a more detailed daily debriefing with the Simulation Sickness Questionnaire. In this paper are presented the results of this monitoring throughout a series of scenarios carried out at the Battle-Lab in 2014, conclusions from the gathered data, as well as lessons learned from the process of both building and studying simulation sickness in the use of peripheral simulators with HMD integration. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-7 Next Gen LVC 1600 M&S Training Transformation: Bridging the Next Generation Joint LVC (15167) 1630 Leveraging Cloud Computing Technology for LVC Training (15101) 1700 Osseus, An Experiment in What’s Next in LVC M&S Architecture (15085) Notes 88 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts M&S TRAINING TRANSFORMATION: BRIDGING THE NEXT GENERATION JOINT LVC 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15167 Mr. Bruce Uphoff Camber Corporation Leavenworth, KS Mr. Michael Koscielniak Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, NM Mr. Brian Gregg Mr. Karl Hines Joint Staff J7 Suffolk, VA Mr. John Mizelle Intelligent Decision Systems, Inc. Suffolk, VA Mr. Daniel Leigeber Intelligent Decision Systems, Inc. Huntsville, AL To enable training of U.S. Forces, Korea (USFK) to “Fight Tonight” (deter/defeat aggression), their Korea Battle Simulation Center (KBSC) has evolved to the Joint Training Transformation Initiative (JTTI) and Korean Simulation System (KSIMS) (JTTI+K) federation of models. This federation is a “one off” solution within DoD, especially with regard to the Joint Staff J7 simulation federation (Joint LVC). Why is this important? Aside from the obvious that in a day of diminishing resources it is difficult to justify and maintain “one-off” approaches, there is the fact that as USFK transforms to US Korea Command (KORCOM) it will fall under the J7 for training capability support. The JLVC and JTTI+K federations are divergent. To support the command structure change and resulting training capability gap, the SECDEF directed an enterprise DoD M&S architecture. It was determined that the JS J7 would provide a software bridge between the JLVC and JTTI+K federations to achieve the SECDEF directive. Los Alamos National Laboratory is working development of the KORCOM Bridge, linking the JLVC and JTTI+K, as part of the next generation JLVC 2020 v0.6 development cycle and faces several challenges. The JTTI+K federation is aggregate based, time managed, connected, reliable delivery and uses the HLA 1.3 NG Pro RTI. JLVC is essentially entity-based, non-time managed, non-connected, best effort delivery, and not previously integrated with KSIMS. The KORCOM Bridge has addressed these challenges and is delivering an initial (production level) capability in FY15. The J7 has conducted a series of KORCOM Bridge integration tests with the JTTI+K at the Joint Digital Integration Facility (JDIF) in Orlando, FL, and with the JTTI+K at the KBSC. This paper captures results of design and integration testing through the initial FY15 delivery of JLVC 2020 v0.6 and how the KORCOM Bridge helps forge future Joint/Coalition M&S capabilities. LEVERAGING CLOUD COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY FOR LVC TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15101 Paul Dumanoir Army, Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation, Project Manager, Integrated Training Environment Orlando FL Henry Marshall Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate Simulation and Training Technology Center Orlando, FL Robert Wells Dynamic Animations Systems Orlando, FL Jeff Truong Effective Applications Corporation Orlando, FL Over the past years the Department of Defense and the Army have been working to accelerate toward wide-scale adoption of cloud computing for the potential cost saving and enhanced mission capabilities that it brings. The Live, Virtual, Constructive – Integrating Architecture (LVC-IA) is a Program of Record (POR), under the Army Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) Project Manager for Integrated Training Environment (PM ITE), which provides a net-centric linkage for existing Training Aids, Devices, Simulations, and Simulators in an ITE. To date the LVC-IA architecture utilizes a series of servers which are physically located in one or more fielding sites. Each instance of an LVC-IA system has to be individually installed and maintained at each site. Building and running these on site systems is complex and expensive. With each instantiation of LVC-IA for the new training sites, the capital and operating expenditures would simply multiply. A research effort was sponsored by PM ITE to evaluate the feasibility of leveraging cloud computing for LVC-IA. This paper summarizes the analysis conducted, architecture design, and prototype implemented from this research effort. The paper dives into the Information Assurance issues encountered and touches on processes from other Army programs as they relate to the Common Operating Environment (COE) Data Center/Cloud (DC/C) Computing Environment (CE). The paper also reports the comparative analysis results between an ITE with co-located LVC-IA versus an ITE with LVC-IA in the cloud. Finally the paper reports the challenges uncovered, lessons learned, and recommended way forward. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 89 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts OSSEUS, AN EXPERIMENT IN NEXT GENERATION LVC M&S ARCHITECTURE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15085 Mark Riecken Trideum Corporation Orlando, Florida Derrick Franceschini StackFrame, LLC Sanford, Florida Scott Gallant Effective Applications Orlando, Florida John Rutledge Trideum Corporation Huntsville, Alabama Walter Barge Director, Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability (JAEC) OSD Force Readiness and Training (FRT) Alexandria, Virginia Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) technologies provide a powerful range of capabilities that the distributed training community enjoys in support of its broad spectrum of training needs. The fundamentals of this LVC capability were built over two decades ago at a time when the modeling and simulation (M&S) community was arguably ahead of commercial information systems, especially in terms of distributed computing and networking. With the advent of many web-based technologies the LVC community now finds itself attempting to integrate new technologies with legacy architectures. Due to the flexibility of the new technologies as well as the inventiveness of the LVC community, this approach has had some success, but these approaches continue to require specialized skillsets and can be costly to establish and maintain. The Defense M&S Coordination Office (DMSCO) has sponsored an effort to describe and prototype selected features of a next generation architecture that leverages recent and emerging technology more directly. This paper describes a framework called Osseus to accomplish these goals. Osseus incorporates desired next generation characteristics such as 1) more open and flexible interoperability between disparate systems; 2) the ability for relatively untrained users to fill in functionality gaps between available systems by dynamically injecting behavioral changes into the LVC environment; 3) the ability to connect services with granularity smaller than an application to increase the capability of the environment; 4) a more accessible means of composing distributed training capabilities for an educated, but non-specialist trainer; 5) data filtering to optimize or reduce data transmission over the network; and 6) centralized data management to facilitate tools such as visualization, data collection, and analysis. This paper discusses architectural aspects of Osseus and selected prototype results which include the integration of OneSAF with an example virtual system. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-8 Simulation Supported Training 0830 Embarking on a Home Station Training Revolution (15176) 0900 Implementation of Role-Based Command Hierarchy Model for Actor Cooperation (15166) 0930 Innovative Division/Brigade Level CO Training Solution for Influence Operations (15107) Notes 90 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts EMBARKING ON A HOME STATION TRAINING REVOLUTION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15176 Anthony J. Cerri TRADOC, G27 OE TSC Newport News, Virginia Alan J. Knox & Mathew N. McMillan CGI Federal Newport News, Virginia As the US Army has been at war for over a decade, the art of developing and conducting Home Station Training (HST) has not been a focal point for our next generation of leaders. Units have become accustomed to having their training provided to them by others prior to overseas deployment. This diminished capability has made it difficult to develop and execute effective HST when that training includes live, virtual and constructive (LVC) environmental considerations. To fully understand the scope of the problem, this paper articulates the processes in which HST is currently designed and developed, and how that training could be supported by Mission Training Centers (MTCs). The process, while not the same for all units, demonstrates the genesis of how training is developed at home station. To help overcome the challenges, the Training Brain Repository-Exercise Design Tool (TBR-EDT), a collaborative, webbased repository and exercise design tool has been created. It enables commanders and staffs to reuse storylines, events, and other exercise related items from within the repository. It allows units to work closely with MTCs to automate and modernize HST lifecycles. The TBR-EDT revolutionizes the current mainstream exercise design process; reducing the time required to develop an exercise and its associated training support package (TSP), due to the enhanced collaborative opportunities between the training unit and the supporting MTC. The TBR-EDT currently supports simulations with start of the exercise (STARTEX) data, provided in multiple machine readable order of battle service, extensible markup language (OBS XML) versions for import into simulation systems. In the future, more robust STARTEX conditions such as terrain, C2, and parametric data will further enhance the simulations environment, and better replicate the operational environment. Finally, the paper will present the TBR-EDT as a game changer for Army and Joint trainers; significantly shortening the design process for realistic and economical HST exercises. IMPLEMENTATION OF ROLE-BASED COMMAND HIERARCHY MODEL FOR ACTOR COOPERATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15166 Jungyoon Kim, Hee-Soo Kim, Jihyun Jang REALTIMEVISUAL Seoul, Republic of Korea Sangjin Lee, Samjoon Park Agency for Defense Development Daejeon, Republic of Korea Many approaches to agent collaboration have been introduced in military war-games, and those approaches address methods for actor- (agent-) collaboration within a team to achieve given goals, where the team’s abstract mission is translated into concrete tasks for each actor. To meet fast-changing battlefield situations, an actor must be 1) loosely coupled with their tasks and be 2) able to take over the role of other actors if necessary to reflect role handovers occurring in real combat. Achieving these requirements allows the transfer of tasks assigned one actor to another actor in circumstances when that actor cannot execute its assigned role, such as when destroyed in action. Tight coupling between an actor and its tasks can prevent role handover in fast-changing situations. Unfortunately, existing approaches and war-game software strictly assign tasks to actors during design, therefore they prevent the loose coupling needed for successful role handover. To overcome these shortcomings, we have defined Role-based Command Hierarchy (ROCH) model that dynamically assigns roles to actors based on their situation at runtime. In the model we devise “Role” to separate actors from their tasks. Described in this paper, we implement the ROCH model as a component that uses a publish-subscribe pattern to handle the link between an actor and the roles of its subordinates (other actors in the team). Therefore, an actor can indirectly send a message (order or report) to another actor without knowing which actor is recipient. The sender actor is only required to know the relevant roles. The model has been implemented and tested in a military project, and we briefly show the outcomes in this paper. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 91 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts INNOVATIVE DIVISION/BRIGADE LEVEL COMMANDING OFFICER TRAINING SOLUTION FOR INFLUENCE OPERATIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15107 Ariane Bitoun & Romain Bosa MASA Group Paris, France Tahar Hannachi Université Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris VI) Paris, France Lionel Khimeche DGA/DS/CATOD Arcueil, France Asymmetric conflicts, involving populations that support armed groups, represent an increasingly significant proportion of all armed conflicts. Influence Operations, which deal directly with this type of warfare, is therefore a sector for which Commanding Officers (COs) at division- or brigade-level must now train. Influence Operations training tools, mostly based on virtual simulations, are today mainly focused on individual skills improvement and increased cultural awareness. Therefore they are not suited to train COs who need high-level information for the planning and successful running of operations. The main challenges regarding these objectives involve i) modeling, simulation and visualization of the abstract concepts of Influence Operations, ii) the definition of operational training scenarios. This paper introduces a solution that departs from classic Influence Operations training solutions, by rising to the challenge of training division- or brigade-level COs and offering a high-level simulation. This solution consists of an innovative platform that integrates an existing constructive simulation, already used to train division- or brigade-level COs, with a new simulation component capable of representing Influence Operations. Indeed simulation-based training platforms, built on constructive simulations, are an efficient and proven means to train at the level we are targeting in traditional military combat. The resulting platform addresses the operational expectations for the training of Influence Operations COs with vital components (preparation, gaming, supervision and analysis) and includes highlevel models to simulate the abstract concepts required to represent Psychological Operations (PSYOP), Key Leader Engagement (KLE) and Civil-Military Cooperation (CIMIC) operations (life-cycle of messages, dynamics of acceptance amongst populations, Target Audiences). Finally, the paper presents an implementation of this solution using an existing aggregated constructive simulation integrated with a dedicated Influence Operations simulation component. This platform is validated using operational training scenarios that highlight Influence Operation challenges. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F S-9 UAS Engineering Design Simulation 0830 Reducing Operational Risk through Better Performance Testing (15138) 0900 Design of an Educational Tool for Unmanned Air Vehicle Design and Analysis (15086) 0930 Using Simulation to Test MannedUnmanned Teaming (15112) Notes 92 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts REDUCING OPERATIONAL RISK THROUGH BETTER PERFORMANCE TESTING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15138 Tom Wilson Lockheed Martin Orlando, Florida One of the more difficult simulations to implement is an accurate load test. In order for a load test to mimic reality, it must reflect the system's activities in function, data, and timing; properly representing the data component is often the most challenging. Nonetheless, load testing must be more than a realistic simulation. It must provide robustness so it can give accurate insight into the system's behavior when other workloads are encountered. This paper describes several methods to improve the robustness of load testing so that it not only gives insight into performance of a system in current operations, but also gives insight into the performance behaviors of the system for workloads yet to be encountered. Key features of the testing include: operationally-representative scenarios, easy-to-change workloads, scalable workloads, scalable data, random parameter generation, and repeatable tests. Since these features are provided independently of the tool used to implement the load test, the methods are easily applied to the load testing of any system. Once applied, a basic requirements verification exercise is transformed into a sophisticated operational riskreduction strategy. DESIGN OF AN EDUCATIONAL TOOL FOR UNMANNED AIR VEHICLE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15086 Brian Sanders, Brent Terwilliger, Ken Witcher & Mark Leary Embry-Ride Aeronautical University Daytona Beach, Florida James Ohlman, Christina Tucker Pinnacle Solutions Huntsville, Alabama Offering laboratories and team projects present significant challenges for delivering Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) courses in the online (asynchronous) modality. These interactive workspaces are important attributes since they provide forums for students to more deeply explore fundamental principles, exercise teamwork and planning to jointly overcome problems, and gain critical experience. The employment of online environments and interactive activities hold the potential to change how fundamental student outcomes measured by accreditation organizations are incorporated and treated in curricula, potentially improving the quality of the overall educational experience. To address this need Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University has teamed with Pinnacle Solutions to develop a realistic unmanned aircraft system (UAS) development, application, and evaluation simulation that educators can integrate into program curriculum. The research contained in this paper addresses simulation development and application starting with identification of basic educational objectives driving the need and how the simulation tool is envisioned to satisfy learning objectives. This will be followed by a description and examples of a multi-environment simulation framework designed to meet those needs. The first is a component test environment where students can investigate basic technical principles of operation and key performance metrics of standalone UAS components such as sensors, communications, and propulsion elements. The second is an integration facility, where students are provided the capability to apply knowledge gained in the previous laboratory to select and combine appropriate elements into a unified subsystem to meet prescribed mission parameters. The third is a flight test environment, where students experiment with development and execution of simulated flight profiles over common terrain environments (i.e., mountainous) to measure operational performance attributes of the completed UAS. The design is anticipated to provide the flexibility to implement each environment sequentially, as described above, or independently; ensuring a solution applicable to a broad range of courses, objectives, outcomes, and student capabilities. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 93 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts USING SIMULATION TO TEST MANNED-UNMANNED TEAMING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15112 Michael J. O’Connor Trideum Corporation Huntsville, AL Kenneth LeSueur, Mark Ebert, Sean Millich Redstone Test Center Huntsville, AL Fred Ventrone CTSi Lexington Park, MD Tom Punihaole Scalable Network Technologies Huntsville, AL Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) allows helicopter pilots to link with Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) and receive video feeds, control payloads, and direct UAS movements. Robust communications protocols are used for this process, however, communications loss does occur due to signal strength, terrain, weather, and jamming. Using live testing to create all of these conditions is difficult and has potential safety and cost issues. To address the need for repeatable testing of these issues, a simulation environment was created to replicate the conditions using live aircraft on the ground. The Joint Unmanned Aircraft Systems Mission Environment (JUAS-ME) is a Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program (CTEIP) for creating test environments for UAS testing. The Army’s portion of the program is focused on MUM-T testing. Two key technologies were developed to support this testing, Hardware-In-the-Loop (HWIL) tactical network simulation and MIL-STD-1553 bus extension. A real-time network simulation that emulates the Standard Common Data Link (SCDL) was built to perturb the data links between the helicopter and UAS. The communications effects server can operate in a physics based mode, fault inject mode, and a hybrid mode. A key test requirement was to exercise the use of the UAS’s onboard lasers that receive commands over a MIL-STD-1553 bus. These non-eye safe lasers could not be fired in the UAS HWIL facility, resulting in the need to move the UAS sensor to another test lab. This extension necessitated the development of a MIL-STD-1553 bus extender to link the test facilities that are 4 miles apart. This paper describes the issues encountered in creating a tactical network simulation with HWIL interfaces and the MIL-STD-1553 bus extender. In particular, several approaches were tried with the network simulation before a workable solution was found. The techniques describe in this paper can be applied to other programs with similar requirements. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-10 Preparation Through Virtualization 1030 Design and Development of a General Virtual Maintenance Training Platform (15312) 1100 Virtual Environment ComputerBased Training for Bridge and Tunnel Inspections (15276) 1130 Developing Authoring Tools for Skills Models that Enable Adaptive Game-Based Maintenance Training (15129) NOTES 94 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A GENERAL VIRTUAL MAINTENANCE TRAINING PLATFORM 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15312 Xingxin Li, Jianping Hao, Fei Ye Shijiazhuang Mechanical Engineering College Shijiazhuang, Hebei, P.R.China Xu Yang The University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN Since the 1990s, Chinese researchers have initiated a series of virtual maintenance training technology studies and system development projects sponsored either by government or industry. Most of them employed similar methodology and developed a training system for the selected equipment and system. In fact, rare of theses software achievements were used and improved continuously. In 2006, a proposal for a general desktop virtual maintenance training platform suitable for diverse user entities and varied training requirements was approved and sponsored by government and enterprise. The resultant software system was put into use in 2009 and with continuous improvements, so far as 2012, the research work was generally recognized and concluded that initial expectations have been met. Further research and development work was sponsored again. The paper describes this general virtual maintenance-training platform (GVMTP) from several aspects. The introduction part addresses the background and a brief description of the research. The design part puts emphasis on the problem identification, potential requirements, goal definition, and relatively detailed platform framework design. The development part mainly describes the platform components, and the realization of three key elements. The application part provides a general applications summary and the effects analysis result. The paper finally presents lessons learned and the further work. GVMTP provides a normalized and systematic process to facilitate and manage all activities throughout the lifecycle of virtual maintenance training product, and also makes the data share and reuse easier during this process. GVMTP is not only a set of training tools, but also a training product generation studio. VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT COMPUTER-BASED TRAINING FOR BRIDGE AND TUNNEL INSPECTIONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15276 Steve Ianni Engility Corporation Virginia Beach, Virginia Mary P. Rosick, P.E. Michael Baker International Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania While physical field trips to bridge and tunnel sites are a critical learning component to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) National Highway Institute’s (NHI) training courses, they are difficult to arrange due to many factors such as safety, time constraints, weather, and costly logistics. In response for an alternative to a physical inspection field trip, bridge engineers at Michael Baker Jr., Inc., a Michael Baker International company, and technical developers at Engility Corporation worked together with FHWA/NHI to create three-dimensional (3D) Virtual Inspection Computer Based Training (CBT). This paper explains several key design, development and implementation elements of the 3D Virtual Inspection. It details the process used to create a comprehensive 3D CBT structured for a blended learning environment. The paper examines the elements used to create approximately 40 interactive checkpoints across three virtual environments that respond to the inspector’s standard toolset. It explains how the CBT incorporates reference documentation and instructor “teachable moments”. This paper also highlights how experts from multiple disciplines (engineering, classroom instruction, 3D modeling, computer programming, etc.) came together to create a unique and successful training tool for the modern classroom. Since its pilot in 2012, NHI successfully delivered the award winning CBT 55 times to approximately 1400 participants. After using the 3D Virtual Inspection CBT as an alternative to the field trip, the virtual environment is now the primary training tool for the safety inspection of in-service bridges and tunnels courses. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 95 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts DEVELOPING AUTHORING TOOLS FOR SKILL MODELS THAT ENABLE ADAPTIVE GAME-BASED MAINTENANCE TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15129 Sean Guarino, Peter Weyhrauch & James Niehaus Charles River Analytics Inc. Cambridge, MA While game-based maintenance training provides a powerful, personalized approach to address individual training needs, it can be costly to update immersive game engines to address new training objectives. Challenges lie not only in the incorporation of new technology that must be trained, but also in the construction of surrounding training materials—curriculums, performance metrics, and optimal training methods—to address procedures for the new technology. In ongoing work with the Air Force Research Laboratories (AFRL), the authors are developing a modeling framework and editing tools for subject matter experts to translate new technology and Technical Orders (TOs) into training objectives, scenarios, and content for existing virtual game-based trainers. The Methodology for Annotated Skill Trees (MAST) provides a formalism that organizes training goals and associated performance metrics, skill decay models, scaffolding models, and effective training methods. This paper discusses the application of this modeling framework to maintenance training for the F-15E aircraft, and the associated development of editing tools to adapt content both in MAST and in the immersive game engine. This paper also describes an approach to improving training by adapting training objectives to support focused repetition of maintenance procedures and review with instructors. Finally, this paper summarizes initial feedback from active duty instructors, and next steps for improving these tools. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320F S-11 Critical Flight Decisions 1030 Toward Acquiring a Human Behavior Model of Competition vs Cooperation (15316) 1100 Embedded Simulation to Prevent Tactical Surprise and Improve Soldier Performance (15054) 1130 Distributed Soldier Representation: Improving M&S Representation of the Soldier (15123) NOTES 96 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TOWARD ACQUIRING A HUMAN BEHAVIOR MODEL OF COMPETITION VS. COOPERATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15316 David V. Pynadath, Ning Wang, and Chirag Merchant Institute for Creative Technologies University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA One of the challenges in modeling human behavior is accurately capturing the conditions under which people will behave selfishly or selflessly. Researchers have been unable to craft purely cooperative (or competitive) scenarios without significant numbers of subjects displaying unintended selfish (or selfless) behavior (e.g., Rapoport & Chammah, 1965). In this work, rather than try to further isolate competitive vs. cooperative behavior, we instead construct an experimental setting that deliberately includes both, in a way that fits within an operational simulation model. Using PsychSim, a multiagent social simulation framework with both Theory of Mind and decision theory, we have implemented an online resource allocation game called “Team of Rivals”, where four players seek to defeat a common enemy. The players have individual pools of resources which they can allocate toward that common goal. In addition to their progress toward this common goal, the players also receive individual feedback, in terms of the number of resources they own and have won from the enemy. By giving the players both an explicit cooperative goal and implicit feedback on potential competitive goals, we give them room to behave anywhere on the spectrum between these two extremes. Furthermore, by moving away from the more common two-player laboratory settings (e.g., Prisoner’s Dilemma), we can observe differential behavior across the richer space of possible interpersonal relationships. We discuss the design of the game that allows us to observe and analyze these relationships from human behavior data acquired through this game. We then describe decision-theoretic agents that can simulate hypothesized variations on human behavior. Finally, we present results of a preliminary playtest of the testbed and discuss the gathered data. EMBEDDED SIMULATION TO PREVENT TACTICAL SURPRISE AND IMPROVE SOLDIER PERFORMANCE 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15054 Dr. Jonathan Stevens University of Central Florida (UCF) Orlando, FL Ms. Latika Eifert Army Research Laboratory (ARL) Orlando, FL Timothy Baldwin EOIR Technologies Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD Oleg Umanskiy Dr. Boris Stilman STILMAN Advanced Strategies University of Colorado Denver Denver, CO The U.S. Army Science and Technology (S&T) Advisory Group created the Technology Enabled Capability Demonstration (TECD) concept in order to demonstrate and measure progress towards meeting the Army's top ten science and technology challenges. One of the designated challenges is the prevention of tactical surprise at the small unit level. Operating under the premise that soldiers at the squad level lack sufficient situational awareness to prevent tactical surprise, the TECD 3 effort was created to increase small unit situational awareness through the fusion of various planning and intelligence systems into a small unit framework. The Linguistic Geometry Real-time Adversarial Intelligence & Decision-making (LG-RAID) simulation is a lightweight course of action (COA) planning tool that employs innovative algorithms to predict enemy activity in a highly reliable and efficient manner. As such, LG-RAID was selected as a participating application in the TECD 3 federation and was embedded on both individual soldiers and tactical vehicles in a lightweight mission command system. In this paper, we discuss how the LG-RAID simulation improved soldier effectiveness, situational awareness and facilitated the prevention of tactical surprise during the execution of four tactical situational training exercises (STXs) held at Fort Dix, NJ and executed by the Army's Experiment Force (EXFOR). Furthermore, we discuss the integration of LG-RAID into the TECD 3 framework and technical challenges that were overcome. Results of this integration and exercise, presented in this paper, highlight the potential value of embedded simulation at the tactical level. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 97 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts DISTRIBUTED SOLDIER REPRESENTATION: IMPROVING M&S REPRESENTATION OF THE SOLDIER 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15123 Manuel Diego, Clayton W. Burford US Army RDECOM Army Research Laboratory Orlando, Florida Joseph S. McDonnell, Ph.D., Bert Davis, Gary Smith Dynamic Animation Systems, Inc. Fairfax, Viginia Derrick Franceschini StackFrame, LLC Sanford, Florida The Army has developed a breadth of Modeling and Simulation (M&S) capabilities representing platforms such as fixed and rotary-winged aircraft, tracked and wheeled vehicles, and weapons systems for various uses and of various fidelities. The Army has represented humans – soldiers, civilians, and threats – in its M&S as well. These representations provide physical model characteristics for mobility, delivery accuracy, lethality, and sensing, as well as behavioral representation to support tactical movement, clearing a building, obtaining Human Intelligence (HUMINT), and treating simulated wounded. These models rarely represent the soldier as a complex system, representing factors such as stress, human physiology, leadership, unit cohesion, and morale, to name a few. Instead, the actions of the simulated soldier are often based on a deterministic model of human behavior. When nondeterministic representations are used, they are often stochastic where random numbers provide variability across iterations, but the variability comes from the random number seed, not from the model. This provides unsatisfactory simulation results for those stakeholders interested in analyzing the effects of the soldier representation, as the simulated soldiers appear robotic or even superhuman. This paper describes the Distributed Soldier Representation (DSR) research and development effort that has been underway at the Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL HRED STTC) for the past two years. In this paper, we describe our research that has identified eleven areas of interest for improving soldier representation. We further describe the development of an innovative Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) that provides a modern web services-based approach to integrate disparate models to address these identified representation gaps. We describe the challenges and benefits achieved by taking a web-services approach, as well as the lessons learned from the web-services integration of the Effects of Stress with One Semi-Automated Forces (OneSAF). Finally, we discuss ongoing development work. THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320B S-12 The Business of Simulations 1330 A MBSE Approach in Modeling Systems Using Hybrid Simulation Techniques (15368) 1400 Simulator Architecture Upgrade Utilizing Virtual Machines (VMs) (15219) 1430 Improved Process for Bridging the Technology Transition Valley of Death (15103) NOTES 98 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts A MBSE APPROACH IN MODELING SYSTEMS USING HYBRID SIMULATION TECHNIQUES 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15368 Asli Soyler Akbas Modeling and Simulation University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Waldemar Karwowski Industrial Engineering and Management Systems University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Modern simulation efforts, vastly improved with recent computing and visual power advancements, provide solutions to various fields such as engineering, defense management and training. The current body of knowledge on simulation from different domains displays this field’s wideness as well as the amount of variation and interaction among its components. Such intricacy and scale drives the need to adapt a holistic and robust approach aiming to support modelers with three core challenges. First, the increasing complexity of modeled problems complicates the ground-up approach. Second, the involvement of stakeholders from various fields and backgrounds introduce additional needs and expectations varying from one to another, each facing unavoidable changes due to shifts in environmental conditions affecting the modeling efforts as well as the model, itself. Finally, the need to maintain the coherency and efficiency of validated models through structural change requests that arise from emerging variables, constraints or states. This paper proposes a methodology for modeling and maintaining hybrid platforms using Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach. The approach is demonstrated by building the architectural model of a hybrid simulation platform using Systems Modeling Language (SysML). The finalized architecture, which consists of an agent-based and systems dynamics parts, is then built and simulated in a C++ based environment. Finally the findings are analyzed to evaluate the benefits and shortfalls of the approach in aiding developers to overcome the challenges through their modeling efforts. SIMULATOR ARCHITECTURE UPGRADE UTILIZING VIRTUAL MACHINES (VMS) 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15219 Thomas Bridgman National TechnologiesAssociates Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio Elizabeth Gaugler AFLCMC/WNSE Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio The Simulators Division of the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) located at WrightPatterson Air Force Base (WPAFB) Ohio is responsible for many Air Force simulator assets. Currently, the state of some of the simulators consists of multiple legacy computer system architectures with nonsupported hardware and operating systems (OS). For example, some of the OSs includes MSDOS 6.22, Windows NT, Windows XP, IBM AIX, and multiple versions of Linux. Furthermore, the simulators consist of several racks of Personal Computer (PC) hardware running a single instance of an OS with single software application. In addition, many of these PC systems are not fully utilizing their resources including CPU, memory, storage, input/output, network, etc. A majority of a simulator’s PCs are internally networked and synchronized together over an internal and external network via multiple switches and routers. With the current system configurations usually consisting of outdated equipment, unsupported hardware, software and OSs, an alternative architecture of Virtual Machines (VMs) may assist the technical obstacles that arise with the inefficiencies of legacy simulator systems. Upgrading legacy simulators with a single or a combination of bare-metal and native hypervisor architectures could provide the means to maintain the legacy OS and software load while simultaneously storing the current OS and application in multiple VMs within the same server. Along with hosting a simulators legacy OS, VMs may also contribute to reduced system administration functions, lower physical system footprint, operational redundancy, reduced power consumption and costs, and provide a more effective security boundary. This paper will investigate some alternatives to simulator hardware, software, and security upgrades with VMs. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 99 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts IMPROVED PROCESS FOR BRIDGING THE TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION VALLEY OF DEATH 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15103 Henry Marshall Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate Simulation and Training Technology Center Orlando Florida Robert Wells Dynamic Animations Systems Orlando, Florida Bob Burch Dignitas Technologies, LLC Orlando, Florida Paul Dumanoir Army, Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation, Project Manager, Integrated Training Environment Orlando, Florida Jeff Truong Effective Applications Corporation Orlando, Florida One of the biggest obstacles facing research organizations is how to effectively develop innovative technologies that transition into Programs of Records (PoRs). On the other hand, Project Managers (PMs) are interested in technology developments efforts that mitigate the technology risks of their PoRs with minimal risks to their existing Engineering, Manufacturing, & Development or Production acquisition phases. Solving this technology transition “valley of death” has long been elusive as technologies have been developed that are not transitioned, and PoRs continue to have their technology gaps that are not addressed. To attempt to solve the quagmire created by this mismatch, the Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL HRED STTC) partnered with the Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) Project Manager for Constructive Simulation (PM ConSim) to develop a new process to bridge the technology transition chasm. The effort created a program called the Risk Reduction Test Bed (RRTB) with a defined process for risk mitigation and streamlined the technology insertion from Research and Development (R&D) programs. This program has quickly become a model for technology maturation and transition between these two organizations. The initial phase of the process requires a capability and technology gap analysis that extends into the project’s users and long-term life cycle. A concurrent activity within this phase includes building representative test beds to develop and test the technologies. The process involves a gap analysis that determines which are feasible and provides the greatest return on investment to the PoRs. The process then develops projects that look at possible solutions. This paper details examples of how this process moves from gaps to solutions to transition to the PoRs providing a model example for any organization seeking to improve their processes in this area. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A T-1 Designing for Training Effectiveness 1400 Measuring Training Effectiveness of Lightweight Gamebased Constructive Simulation (15007) 1430 Validating Scenario-based Training Sequencing: The Scenario Complexity Tool (15102) 1500 Adaptive Instructor Operating Stations: Design to Decrease Instructor Workload and Increase Effectiveness (15336) NOTES 100 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts MEASURING TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS OF LIGHTWEIGHT GAME-BASED CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15007 Dr. Jonathan Stevens Ms. Latika Eifert Dr. Boris Stilman Dr. Oleg Umanskiy Dr. Stephen R. Serge Army Research University of Colorado STILMAN Advanced Mr. Dean Reed Laboratory (ARL) Denver Strategies University of Central Orlando, FL STILMAN Advanced Denver, CO Florida (UCF) Strategies Orlando, FL Denver, CO The U.S. Army continues to employ constructive and game-based simulation for training. While both classes of simulation have been found to lower the cost of training, it is still unknown whether or not these classes are actually effective training mechanisms. The Linguistic Geometry Real-time Adversarial Intelligence and Decision-making (LG-RAID) simulation is a lightweight, game-based, constructive simulation that exploits novel game theory to create intelligent, predictive and tactically-correct Courses of Action (COAs) for exercise participants at the company echelon and below. The primary goal of this study was to examine the training effectiveness and usability of the U.S. Army's LG-RAID simulation in an operationally relevant environment. A secondary objective of this study was to assess both the usability and functionality of the simulation in order to improve the technology through future design recommendations. Qualified Soldiers were randomly assigned to one of two training treatments (LG-RAID or a traditional planning method) and tasked to develop, plan and brief a tactically sound operational mission in order to empirically assess the training effectiveness of LG-RAID. The independent variable was training treatment. Dependent variables included performance and individual survey responses. Experimentation was conducted at Fort Benning, GA and performance was evaluated by accredited Army instructors. Results of this study indicate that LG-RAID shows promise as an effective training simulation tool when compared to the baseline condition. VALIDATING SCENARIO-BASED TRAINING SEQUENCING: THE SCENARIO COMPLEXITY TOOL 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15102 Robb Dunne, PhD Innovative Reasoning LLC Orlando, FL Stephen A. Sivo, PhD University of Central Florida Orlando, FL Nathan Jones MCSC PM TRASYS Orlando, FL Effective and efficient Scenario-Based Training (SBT) is sequenced using well-grounded instructional strategies and learning theory. The primary instructional strategy employed by the Military requires that SBT is sequenced in a “crawl-walk-run” trajectory. For software to sequence scenarios effectively and efficiently in this manner, SBT needs objective, computational values of a scenario’s complexity, but designers, software engineers and trainers operate without the necessary tools to objectively calculate Scenario Complexity (SC). This results in subjectively sequenced SBT that may be ineffective, inefficient, or designed without attention to sound instructional practices. To address this issue, research in education, task complexity, task framework and cognitive resource principles was integrated and an innovative SC tool (patent pending) comprised of an algorithm and supporting process, was developed to objectively and computationally define SC. This paper presents findings from the use of the SC tool to validate a training matrix embedded in the United States Marine Corps’ M1A1 Advanced Gunnery Training System. To establish that the SC tool is accurate and effective, it was first necessary to determine how consistent the Subject Matter Expert (SME) evaluations of the scenario’s characteristics were. Then, using the results of their input to the SC algorithm, determine how well the SME sequencing matched that of the training matrix. The objective was to use the SC tool to verify and validate the “crawl-walk-run” sequencing of the training matrix and identify any areas in need of adjustment. After employing the SC tool, quantitative analyses showed that the SMEs were very consistent in their formulations. Importantly, the SC tool revealed that the training matrix deviates alarmingly from “crawl-walkrun” sequencing. This paper also presents the study’s methodology and algorithm, lessons learned and the future impact that this innovative SC tool may have upon design, development and evaluation of SBT and automated, adaptive training. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 101 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ADAPTIVE INSTRUCTOR OPERATING STATIONS: DESIGN TO DECREASE INSTRUCTOR WORKLOAD AND INCREASE EFFECTIVENESS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15336 James A. Pharmer, Laura M. Milham Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division Orlando, FL John A. Valaitis, John Winters Basic Commerce and Industries, Inc. (BCI) Clifton Park, NY Dahlgren, VA Design of human computer interfaces that support instructors in conducting training events can be a challenge. In some cases, instructor operator stations (IOSs) are not designed around the task of instruction. Without a human factors approach to design, resultant systems can increase the workload of the instructors, possibly decreasing the training value of the event. The objective of the Office of Naval Research (ONR) sponsored Adaptive Training for Combat Information Center (ATCIC) effort is to utilize adaptive training research to drive the design of IOS concepts that support instructor effectiveness and increase efficiency through the reduction of workload for monitoring and debriefing scenario based exercises. To achieve this objective, the team utilized the McCracken & Aldrich (1984) method of predicting the Visual, Auditory, Cognitive, Psychomotor (VACP) task demands. As a measure of potential improvement in temporal demands on instructors, a time-based predictive workload analysis identified potential impacts of design improvements on time spent on each task within a scenario based training exercise. This guided the development and evaluation of an instructor interface to support observation of student performance, assessment, event driven performance checklists, and remediations. Results indicated a 26% reduction in total estimated instructor task time required to conduct a scenario based training event when supported by adaptive training tools. This approach complemented empirical user evaluations of the IOS in a field setting (Milham, Pharmer, & Fok, 2015). This paper will discuss the approach, findings, and how this method can be integrated into an iterative design approach to address workload issues with operators. TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A T-2 VR, AR, and AV for Training “Reality” 1600 Training Effectiveness Evaluation of Augmented Virtuality for Call for Fire Training: Insights from a Novice Population (15014) 102 1630 Empirically Derived Recommendations for Training Novices Using Virtual Worlds (15038) NOTES 1700 Using Augmented Reality to Tutor Military Tasks in the Wild (15050) Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts METRICS ASSESSMENT TOWARD A TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION OF AUGMENTED VIRTUALITY FOR CALL FOR FIRE TRAINING: INSIGHTS FROM A NOVICE POPULATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15014 Julie N. Salcedo, Stephanie J. Lackey & Roberto Champney Design Interactive, Inc. Orlando, FL Stephen R. Serge & Jonathan Hurter Institute for Simulation & Training University of Central Florida Orlando, FL Gino Fragomeni Army Research Lab Simulation and Training Technology Center Orlando, FL Call for Fire (CFF) is a highly complex and dynamic task to train. Existing CFF training systems offer immersive training experiences, yet high set-up and implementation costs and limited system portability inhibit fulfillment of throughput requirements. Augmented Virtuality (AV) may be a viable solution to reduce costs associated with CFF Simulation-Based Training, improve system portability, increase throughput, and enhance the immersive experience. AV involves the blending of live and virtual training elements to create a highly immersive experience with greater task fidelity. This experiment represents an initial metrics and experimental protocol assessment in a series of training effectiveness evaluation experiments investigating the performance and learner perception tradeoffs of AV technologies applied to the CFF task domain. Results reveal trends toward increased learner self-efficacy, positive perceptions of system fidelity and usability, and high ratings for immersion, engagement, and presence. These findings confirm the validity of the selected performance metrics and subjective measures for the assessment of AV technologies for CFF training and also inform the empirical recommendations to improve the quality of follow-on training effectiveness evaluations. EMPIRICALLY DERIVED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRAINING NOVICES USING VIRTUAL WORLDS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15038 Crystal S. Maraj, Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola, & Sherry L. Ogreten Institute for Simulation and Training University of Central Florida Orlando, FL Stephanie J. Lackey Design Interactive, Inc. Orlando, FL Douglas B. Maxwell U.S. Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Human Simulation and Training Technology Orlando, FL The U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s Army Learning Concept 2015 and Army Training Concept 2025 discuss the requirements for adaptive soldier learning models with flexible training delivery methods. Current Game-Based Virtual Environments (GBVEs) have the ability to provide Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT) training based on the Army’s requirements, but only for small unit operations. Existing GBVEs lack the capability to support large numbers of users in the same environment at one time or allow the users to engage in critical thinking. Virtual World (VW) technology offers viable solutions to flexibility and scalability challenges found in traditional simulation-based MOUT training such as room clearing tasks, as well as demonstrated the ability to impart valuable training for such tasks. Previous research indicates less experienced Soldiers benefit from VW training (Lackey, Salcedo, Matthews, & Maxwell, 2014). The evidence suggests a need to empirically explore the impact of VW training for operationally relevant tasks on inexperienced populations. This paper presents the results from the second study in a multi-year series of VW Training Effectiveness Evaluations (TEE). The present experiment investigates performance outcomes and user perceptions of 64 novice Soldiers (e.g., ROTC Cadets) using traditional and VW training methods for a room clearing task. Results indicate significant Pearson’s product-movement correlation coefficients between the stress-state survey DSSQ and the workload survey NASA- TLX for each training condition and combined training. The survey results offer insight into performance outcomes for the room clearing task. Furthermore, the results reported herein contribute empirically-derived recommendations for the design, development, and implementation of VW training. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 103 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts USING AUGMENTED REALITY TO TUTOR MILITARY TASKS IN THE WILD 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15050 Dr. Joseph J. LaViola Jr. , Brian M. Williamson, Conner Brooks, Sergiu Veazanchin University of Central Florida Orlando, FL Dr. Robert Sottilare, Pat Garrity U.S. Army Simulation & Training Technology Center Orlando, FL Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) have been shown to be effective in training a variety of military tasks. However, these systems are often limited to laboratory settings on standard PCs and laptops which focus on exercising cognitive skills (e.g., decision-making and problem solving) and may potentially limit the learning and retention of the dismounted Soldiers and Marines training to master physical tasks. Augmented reality presents the possibility of combining intelligent tutoring with hands-on applications in realistic physical environments. In this paper, we examine the use of an augment-reality based adaptive tutoring system for instruction in the wild, locations where no formal training infrastructure is present, and identify the challenges that arise when developing such a system. We began the transition from desktop tutoring to the wild by exploring an existing real life mockup of a market scene along with low cost commercial-off-the-shelf devices (e.g., HMDs coupled with depth cameras) and a 3D model of the environment. The goal of our scanning approach is to use “human in the loop” 3D scene acquisition via augmented reality so that the scene can be scanned efficiently and with complete coverage. Using this 3D model, intelligent tutoring systems can adaptively manage instruction while being aware of the physical and augmented objects in the scenario. Furthermore, with this awareness of the physical environment, we hope to provide augmented effects and objects (e.g., virtual humans) that register to the physical environment and respond realistically to interactions with the trainee. We also explored developing a training scenario for evaluation of our system that is made to work with emerging low-cost commercial augmented reality devices (e.g., Epson Moverio). Our approach examines the merging of intelligent tutoring with augmented reality to be used for hands-on immersive training of psychomotor tasks in a setting beyond the typical desktop tutoring session. WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A T-3 Physician Know Thyself! Enhancing Surgical Team Skills through Gaming and Simulation 0830 Developing Game-Based Leadership Training for Robotic Surgeons (15198) 0915 The Use of Hyper-Realistic Surgical Simulation (15244) NOTES 104 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts DEVELOPING GAME-BASED LEADERSHIP TRAINING FOR ROBOTIC SURGEONS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15198 Roger Smith & Alyssa Tanaka Steve McIlwain & Brad Willson Florida Hospital Nicholson Center ARA/Virtual Heroes Celebration, FL Raleigh, NC All surgeons must simultaneously perform as skilled practitioners and effective team leaders in the operating room. This is further complicated in robotic surgery because the surgeon is removed a short distance from the operating table and works from within a specialized cockpit. This separation creates a unique hurdle when a crisis arises that requires the surgeon to disengage from the immediate steps of the surgery to provide leadership and guidance with issues involving the team, the equipment, the room, or the patient. To develop and test these skills we initially created a series of scenario-based videos with quizzes to evaluate surgeon understanding of these leadership responsibilities. Using these as a guide, we developed a game-based virtual environment containing the same information as the videos but in a 3D interactive space which is accessible through a web browser. This environment presents accessible and engaging scenarios that include a scoring mechanism which can assess the time to react to events, the actions that occur before and after a decision, and the correctness of the decision made. The tool can also present alternative or repetitive scenarios when the student does not take the correct action. This paper describes the development process and the interactions with the surgeons and operating room teams which drove the design and content of the virtual environment. The paper also describes the longer term plans to validate the content and introduction of the game to multiple surgical training sites around the country. Though the virtual environment uses a more interactive method for presenting leadership and team decision making information, we are interested in whether it is more effective than traditional didactic lectures, textual instructions, videos, and live role playing. THE USE OF HYPER-REALISTIC SURGICAL SIMULATION 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15244 Anthony J. LaPorta, M.D., FACS, Professor of Surgery and Military Medicine, Rocky Vista University School of Medicine Parker, CO Charles Hutchinson, DO, United States Army Mark Lea, M.D., FACS, Associate Professor of Anatomy and Surgery Rocky Vista University Douglas Robinson, MS4, Senior medical student at Rocky Vista University Roy Alson, M.D., Michael Czekajlo, Alan Moloff, D.O., PhD, key for M.D., PhD. Director of MPH. United States Prehospital Care, Simulation, Hunter Army Retired Special Wake Forest Maguire Veterans Operations and University. Medical Administration Aerospace Medicine Director of Disaster Hospital, Virginia Services, NC Commonwealth Winston-Salem, NC University Reginald Lawrence Gaul, Douglas Granger, Tuan Hoang, Franciose, M.D., M.D., FACS, PhD, Director of M.D., FACS, FACS, Chairman Chief Medical Salivary Commander, of Trauma Officer United Biometrics at United States Surgery at Vail States Ski Team, Arizona State Navy. Valley Medical Vail Valley University and San Diego, CA Center Medical Center Salimetrics, Inc. Traditional didactic educational approaches, though necessary to acquire basic biomedical knowledge, often fail to bring medical students to a full comprehension of medical issues. This awareness often develops only after firsthand experiences in the clinic. In order to enhance student competence and confidence as well as increase students’ ability to apply knowledge and technical skills prior to commencing third-year clinical clerkships, Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine (RVUCOM) in Parker, Colorado, has developed an Intensive Surgical Skills Course (ISSC). This immersive short course mimics a General Surgery rotation, and utilizes the Human-Worn, Partial-Task Simulator (also known as the "CutSuit") (Mueller, Moloff, Wedmore, Schoeff, LaPorta, 2012), (Hunt, B; Wall, V; LaPorta, A.J.; Rush, R; Moloff, A; Schoeff, JE; Tieman, M; Lea, M; 2012), (Mueller G.; Hunt B.; Wall, V.; Rush, R.; Moloff, A.; Schoeff J.; Wedmore, I.; Schmid, J.; LaPorta, A.J.; 2012). The balance between beneficial stress (induction of enhanced memory and recall performance) and detrimental stress (impairment of memory and learning) may represent a fine line. Measuring the students' reaction to stressful events before, during, and after realistic education scenarios creates a biomarker profile of the educational event, which then is correlated with the training tasks. This profile, along with other qualitative or quantitative measures such as technical tasks and cognitive knowledge, can be modeled in a simulation that increases the complexity of training without overstressing the individual. This simulation model allows a professor to develop a course that maximizes the habituation and thus retention of knowledge. This model is particularly applicable to physicians in training (medical students) as they seek to achieve advanced skills and knowledge in the fields of triage, emergency medicine, and surgery in preparation for entering their third year rotations. The central hypothesis of the present study is that medical students can advance their proficiencies, and reduce performance anxiety, through intensive immersion training. This innovative medical simulation research may provide a model for future medical education. It also suggests components of a possible model for determining the return on investment (ROI) of simulation training dollars. With diminishing training dollars, more effective ways to determine ROI have been advanced within the Department of Defense. (Oswalt, et. all, 2011) Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 105 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts WEDNESDAY, 2 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A T-4 Team Building: All for One and One for All 1600 Effects of Virtual Emergency Training on Mine Rescue Team Dynamics (15119) 1630 Alternative Front End Analysis for Automated Complex Systems (15121) 1700 The Team Multiple Errands Test: A Platform to Evaluate Distributed Teams (15264) NOTES ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF VIRTUAL EMERGENCY TRAINING ON MINE RESCUE TEAM EFFICACY 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15119 Hoebbel C, Bauerle T, Macdonald B, Mallett L The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Pittsburgh, PA To reach trapped miners, underground mine rescue teams might be required to perform a variety of non-routine tasks (e.g., fight fire, pump water, support unsafe roof) as they encounter hazardous and rapidly changing conditions. Due to risks associated with such conditions, underground mine rescue team training has traditionally been performed using live exercises in the form of competitive drills in above-ground facilities or open fields. Oftentimes these contests utilize printed paper placards to represent environmental conditions and have strict rules which were developed for comparative assessment purposes. Although widely used, these contests have undetermined ‘real world’ application, are low fidelity, and have limited documented evidence for effectiveness. Both miners and subject matter experts have emphasized the need for more realistic and engaging training environments to enhance the learning experience of all miners and emergency responders. To this end, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has developed a fully immersive dynamic virtual training environment for mine emergency responders. During training scenarios, rescue teams approach the problem and perform as they would in “real life” utilizing virtual representative equipment, with success dependent on effective communication and group decision-making. This study represents the first documented empirical attempt at evaluating the effectiveness of virtual reality training for mine rescue teams in the United States, and this paper discusses the utility of such environments for not only delivering realistic and engaging training, but for conducting behavioral research activities. Associations among psychosocial factors such as training climate, team familiarity, and team efficacy are examined and, in general, the study results support findings and recommendations found in the emergency teamwork literature. The results of this effort will add to the research base on mine emergency response training and assessment as well as provide insights into emergency response team behavior. 106 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts ALTERNATIVE FRONT END ANALYSIS FOR AUTOMATED COMPLEX SYSTEMS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15121 Natalie Drzymala, Tim Buehner Natim Research Tallahassee, Florida M. Glenn Cobb U.S. Army Research Institute Fort Benning, Georgia John Nelson Engility Corporation Leavenworth, Kansas Linda Brent The ASTA Group, LLC Pensacola, Florida A growing body of literature reports that task-based analyses alone are not sufficient for determining training requirements for highly automated, complex systems that rely upon multilevel command and control integration. This has spurred concerns among Army leaders that the traditional Systems Approach to Training (SAT) Front End Analysis (FEA) strategy may not sufficiently identify training requirements for some emerging systems, and provided impetus for our research effort to develop an alternative FEA strategy better suited for these types of systems. The first phase of our effort focused on the research and design of potential alternative FEA strategies. The second phase provided a use case application of an alternative FEA to existing air and missile defense system training to validate and refine the strategy. During the third phase of our effort, we applied the alternative FEA to an emerging integrated air and missile defense architecture. The refined alternative FEA strategy supplements traditional SAT analyses with team-based and expertise-based analyses and was used to successfully identify requirements beyond those found through traditional SAT methods alone. EVALUATING DISTRIBUTED TEAMS WITH THE TEAM MULTIPLE ERRANDS TEST 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15264 Jamiahus Walton, Stephen Gilbert, PhD., Eliot Winer, Ph.D., Michael Dorneich, Ph.D., Desmond Bonner Iowa State University Ames, IA Modern day teams, whether in the military or civilian workplace, have the ability to achieve goals that are otherwise unobtainable by individuals. The timing and characteristics of feedback that teams receive during training are critical. Though there is a solid foundation of research on optimal feedback, there is limited exploration of what constitutes ideal team feedback including addressing the individual team member versus the whole team and whether that feedback is public (visible to the entire team) or private (visible only to one member of the team). Previous research that studied the effect of feedback on team performance has yielded slightly different conclusions. For example, research focused on the privacy of feedback suggests that public feedback can have a motivational effect that improves performance. The aim of this work is to discover the most effective combination of the target and privacy of feedback. To accomplish this goal a modified version of the Multiple Errands Test (MET) was developed to evaluate the performance of three-member teams, the Team MET (TMET). The MET, normally used for evaluating cognitive processing, requires that specific rules be followed while completing multiple tasks within a time constraint. Participants performed the TMET while coordinating purchases in a virtual mall. In each of four timed shopping sessions, participants received feedback on their performance as an individual and team. Feedback was given in one of four conditions: individual private, team private, individual public, and team public. Task performance and rule errors were measured as dependent variables. Results did not yield a broadly significant effect of feedback condition on team or individual performance. However, the study did demonstrate the validity of the TMET as a platform for assessing a team's ability to perform under heavy cognitive load. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 107 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A T-5 Where’s Who Go? – Operational Considerations for LVC Training 0830 Exercise Management Considerations for Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) Training (15281) 0900 Integrating Warship Bridge, Combat, and Deck Teams in LVC Environment (15191) 0930 Capability Assessment of Test and Live Training Systems for Real Time Casualty Assessment (15364) NOTES EXERCISE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR LIVE, VIRTUAL, AND CONSTRUCTIVE (LVC) TRAINING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15281 Katherine P. Kaste, Kelly Neville & Melissa Walwanis Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD) Orlando, FL Amy Bolton Office of Naval Research (ONR) Arlington, VA As integrated training events evolve to include Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) entities, multiple safety considerations, inside and outside of the cockpit, need to be considered. The current Navy Aviation Simulation Master Plan (NASMP) states, “Safety must be an integral part of planning and execution. Live blue and red platform displays, training mode functionality and training rules must help mitigate safety risks associated with an LVC environment” (NASMP Policy IV). The Office of Naval Research’s (ONR) Science and Technology (S&T) effort, Virtual and Constructive Representations on Live Avionics Displays (VCR LAD), has identified multiple areas through interviews and thematic analysis where LVC has the potential to impact integrated training. In this paper, we focus on implications for training exercise management, including Range Training Officer (RTO) and Range Safety Officer (RSO) activities. There are various areas of concern within training exercise management, including delegation of workload amongst personnel (e.g., RTOs, RSOs) and whether existing interface designs and work support tools can adequately support the conduct and oversight of LVC training. Additionally, new positions may need to be introduced and integrated into the exercise management team. Further, new exercise management practices may need to be adopted. This paper presents initial findings and associated recommendations for exercise management technologies, roles, responsibilities, and practices, as well as, future research needed to determine and evaluate specific solutions to those recommendations. 108 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts INTEGRATING WARSHIP BRIDGE, COMBAT, AND DECK TEAMS IN LVC ENVIRONMENT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15191 Eric Phipps Engility, Incorporated San Diego, CA Richard Gaughen Camber, Incorporated San Diego, CA This paper investigates means to integrate USN surface warship bridge, deck and combat watch teams in a Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) training environment. Issue: Currently the US Navy’s LVC distributed training environment (called Fleet Synthetic Training - FST) only incorporates ship’s combat watch teams and squadron staffs, participating from their ships in serious games (i.e., scenarios), but do not include integral decisions and actions made by bridge and deck watch teams. Yet bridge and deck watch teams are an integral part of the combat effectiveness of a ship, especially in the visual environment in which many actions take place. Some examples of required total watch team integration are defense against fast, small boat threats, critical infrastructure/critical asset protection, and vessel Visit, Board, Search and Seizure (VBSS) operations. But in FST the bridge and deck watch teams are role-played by the white cell, muting the team-building required to create a cohesive, effective combat crew, and missing the chain-of-command interactions from gun crews to other ships to the squadron commodore. Means: This paper looks at two possibilities for incorporating bridge and deck teams into scenarios. The first is to use a dedicated bridge training facility integrated into FST. The second is to use virtual reality or augmented reality headsets, worn by watchstanders aboard ship, and integrated into FST. Applications of both approaches are closely examined, including the Office of Naval Research current effort to connect key personnel from the bridge, deck crews and Combat Information Center aboard ship with helicopter crews in a common simulated scenario. Optimal use of both virtual and augmented reality is examined. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT OF TEST AND LIVE TRAINING SYSTEMS FOR REAL-TIME CASUALTY ASSESSMENT 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15364 Joan H. Johnston U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) Human Research and Engineering Directorate (HRED) Simulation and Training Technology Center (STTC), Orlando, FL Margaret D. Nolan Training Analysis, Design & Evaluation Division Naval Air Warfare Center, Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD) Orlando, FL Jake Caldwell University of Central Florida (UCF) Orlando, FL The Army needs the ability to characterize the effectiveness of test and live training systems to improve realistic training and real-time arbitration of casualties. For years, the Army testing and live training communities have strived to develop a robust Real Time Casualty Assessment (RTCA) capability. Currently, both communities are working closely to develop the ability to characterize the degree to which specific, identified capability upgrades to test and live training systems could improve RTCA. This project leveraged a capabilities based assessment method developed for the USMC Squad Immersive Training Environment (previously published as an I/ITSEC paper- Johnston, Dunfee, et al., 2012). This paper describes the methods and findings of the Systematic Team Assessment of Readiness Training (START) method as it was applied to a use-case of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV) crew training. A baseline capability assessment of the live training environment for the BFV is described in terms of its ability to support effective live Force-on-Force (FoF) training and RTCA. We describe how the START method was employed to establish environmental attribute (e.g., battlefield effects) capability gaps that are used to prioritize investments in test and live training systems based on the degree to which the investments could improve training and RTCA effectiveness. Using the methodology, quantitative and qualitative data on current testing and training capability was collected. The results of this data collection will be presented in this paper. This is a collaborative effort among the Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI), the Army Test and Evaluation T&E Command, the Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD), and the US Army Research Laboratory Human Research and Engineering Directorate (ARL-HRED). Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 109 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER, 2015 ROOM S320A T-6 ISR, CRM, TDM, Oh My! – Different Domains, Universal Strategies 1030 Improving Military Crew Resource Management Using a Commercial Strategy Game (15097) 1100 Simulation and Training Challenges for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Analysts (15175) 1130 Effectiveness of Process Level Feedback at Training Tactical Decision Making (15201) NOTES IMPROVING MILITARY CREW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT USING A COMMERCIAL STRATEGY GAME 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15097 Christopher Roos, Jelke van der Pal, Ghanshaam Sewnath & Johan Meijer National Aerospace Laboratory NLR Amsterdam, The Netherlands Lt. Col. Michel de Rivecourt Centre for Man in Aviation CML, Royal Netherlands Air Force Soesterberg, The Netherlands Crew Resource Management (CRM) training has been among the staple diet when addressing Human Factors within military aviation, both in the initial and recurrent training phases. In recurrent training, CRM modules traditionally focus on creating awareness of the role of non-technical skills such as decision making in safe operations. While awareness can be successfully raised by CRM courses, actual change of non–technical behavior is still a challenge. Military aviators often claim it is difficult to implement the theoretical aspects of CRM training in practice. Therefore, a solution is needed where non-technical skills can be applied in a relatively rich way, including team aspects and time pressure, to create situations where human factors issues may be experienced and trained. At the same time, the solution is subject to many constraints: it needs to be short (to fit into a regular CRM training day), cost effective and easy to use. To address this challenge, the potential of commercial video games was evaluated empirically. Based on the CRM training module, a ‘suitability analysis’ was performed on a range of different commercial video games, decomposing the different game elements of each game. Resulting from the analysis, a training solution using the game “XCOM – Enemy Within” was developed. This training solution was subsequently applied in a CRM training course. Using video recordings, team and individual behavior have been analyzed thoroughly to identify the game’s potential for producing CRM behavior as well as effect on dynamics of group behavior and decision making. Key training effectiveness evaluation points included depth and variety of challenges posed by the game, trainee potential to implement CRM and instructor possibility to evaluate CRM behaviors. Results indicate the game is effective in developing CRM behavior in trainees and leads to sufficient feedback input for instructors. 110 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts SIMULATION AND TRAINING CHALLENGES FOR INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE ANALYSTS 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15175 Lisa Tripp, Elliot Humphrey, Christine Covas-Smith, Jonathan Diemunsch Air Force Research Laboratory WPAFB, OH Mike Garrity, Cullen Jackson, Mike Keeney, Sterling Wiggins Aptima Washington, D.C. Aircrews have leveraged simulation for several decades to immerse themselves in complex mission situations, develop new concepts of operations (CONOPS) and tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) for the next fight, test new capabilities, and develop robust and adaptable mission performance. While the Air Force endorses simulation-based training as a vital need for aircrews, currently there is not an analogous capability available for intelligence analysts. This gap becomes more crucial as we prepare the next generation of analysts for potentially drastically different operational environments where Air Supremacy is not guaranteed, denied environments are the norm, and cyber warfare plays a frightening role. Simulation-based training is needed to prepare analysts for these environments. Although, in general, simulation-based training is thriving across many domains (e.g., flight simulation, driving simulation, shooting simulation), little work has focused on training for Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) professionals. Requirements for developing a realistic, simulation-based training environment for ISR tasks are distinctive from those required for Aircrews. Simulation of the large variety of information sources is the key. The objective of the current effort was to identify the requirements underlying development of a simulation-based training capability to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of training for ISR. To tackle this complex problem set, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Warfighter Readiness Research Division leveraged Mission Essential Competency analysis in conjunction with cognitive task analysis to identify key requirements for high fidelity, simulation-based training for the ISR. This paper will describe the challenges facing creation of simulation-based training for ISR, work to develop a training capability for these critical warfighters, and our vision for future ISR simulationbased training. EFFECTIVENESS OF PROCESS LEVEL FEEDBACK AT TRAINING TACTICAL DECISION MAKING 2015 IITSEC Paper No. 15201 Meredith Carroll, Christina K. Padron, Stephanie Quinn, Glenn Surpris, Brent Winslow Design Interactive, Inc. Orlando, FL Erica Viklund Pacific Science and Engineering San Diego, CA Decision making is a critical skill throughout all echelons of the military. From command and control to the front line, Warfighters must be trained to quickly and effectively make decisions. Key to the development of effective decision makers is the utilization of targeted learning strategies, designed to improve an individual’s decision making process. One such strategy is process level feedback, which provides information regarding how effectively an individual is utilizing task strategies or performing task sub steps necessary to achieve task goals. Process level feedback can be employed to improve decision making skills by identifying and correcting breakdowns in the decision making process. A process level feedback method to target decision making skills was developed for use in simulation-based training. This feedback method incorporates outcome feedback with process level feedback aimed at decomposing decision making performance into sub-processes using the OODA loop as the theoretical model (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act; Boyd, 1987). Feedback is provided on errors/error patterns across these sub-processes. This feedback strategy was evaluated in a series of experiments conducted both in the laboratory and in the field with Marines. In the laboratory study, participants who were recruited from the community performed tactical decision making tasks in a simulation testbed and either received the process level feedback or a control condition of outcome feedback. A similar study was conducted with experienced Marine Corps squad leaders. Marines at the School of Infantry East received training utilizing either a simulation-based training approach which incorporated this process level feedback method or simulation training with methods traditionally used in the Marine Corps. This paper will describe the process level feedback method, present results of both experimental studies, and discuss implications and lessons learned for implementing this method in a military training setting. Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 111 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts PDF FILES OF THE 2015 TUTORIAL PRESENTATIONS ARE INCLUDED ON THE PROCEEDINGS CD. PLEASE SEE THE TUTORIALS SECTION OF THIS BOOK FOR SCHEDULE AND SYNOPSES DETAILS. NOTES 112 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts TABLE OF AUTHORS Abbott, Robert, 56 Browne, Michael, 83 Durlach, Paula, 41 Acharya, Girish, 58 Bryan, Derek, 11 Dykes, Carol Ann, 71 Akbas, Mustafa Ilhan, 15 Buehner, Tim, 107 Eady, Michael, 79 Alban, Angela, 49 Bullock, Charles, 83 Ebert, Mark, 94 Allbeck, Jan, 27 Bunch, Larry, 31 Eckman, Stephen, 86 Allen, Christine, 77 Burch, Bob, 100 Edwards, Harvey, 31 Allison, Dan, 75 Burford, Clayton, 98 Eifert, Latika, 97, 101 Alson, Roy, 105 Burke, Brian, 38 Enloc, Michael, 47 Amburn, Charles, 52 Burke, Shawn, 18, 77 Eslami, Mohammed, 28 Amico, William, 11 Caison, Chad, 57 Eum, Junho, 69 Amilde Lovlid, Rikke, 87 Caldwell, Jake, 109 Fabiano, Gregory, 54 Anastasopoulos, Panos, 54 Capriglione, Christin, 12 Faircloth, Mitchell, 79 Anderson, Benjamin, 56 Carabello, Helga, 38 Fautua, David, 19 Ariotti, Scott, 44 Carpenter, Jim, 58 Faxon, Christopher, 13 Armstrong, Stuart, 37 Carroll, Meredith, 111 Fefferman, Kevin, 78 Askvig, Jerrit, 82 Case, Scott, 81 Flanagan, Scott, 25 Atkinson, Beth, 87 Cerri, Anthony, 91 Fleener, Graham, 75 Ayaz, Hasan, 40 Cerritelli, Laura, 77 Fleming, Michael, 37 Badillo-Urquiola, Karla, 55, 103 Chalmers, Robert, 11 Forsythe, Chris, 56 Bair, Lisa Jean, 72 Champney, Roberto, 103 Fragomeni, Gino, 103 Baldwin, Timothy, 97 Chang, In-Chung, 66 Franceschini, Derrick, 90, 98 Balint, John, 27 Cintron, Luis, 76 Franciose, Reginald, 105 Bamberger, Robert, 11 Cobb, M. Glenn, 107 Franciosi, James, 51 Banko, Katherine, 39 Coolahan, James, 70 Frank, Mark, 54 Bannan, Brenda, 57 Cooley, Tim, 73 Franken, Igor, 74 Barge, Walter, 90 Cooney, Lisa, 49 Frascati, Alicia, 17 Barie, Sean, 68, 81 Coovert, Michael, 13 Frazier, Spencer, 16 Barnieu, Joanne, 26 Covas-Smith, Christine, 111 Freeman, Barbara, 16 Basavaraj, Prateek, 15 Cox, Brennan, 31 Freeman, Jared, 28, 64 Bauerle, T, 106 Craven, Patrick, 40 Freeman, Michael, 46 Beaubien, Jeffrey, 9 Creighton, Doug, 30 Friedman, Mark, 46 Bechtel, Bob, 15 Creighton, Tom, 42 Froytlog Hole, Siren Elise, 22 Beck, Dennis, 45 Crutchfield, James, 51 Fuller, Marvin, 17, 45 Bell, Morris, 37 Crutchfield, Richard, 81 Gallagher, Shane, 57 Benito, Juan, 16 Cullen, Sean, 29, 77 Gallant, Scott, 90 Bent, Margaret, 50 Czekajlo, Michael, 105 Gallimore, Jennie, 38 Benton, Nancy, 38 Davidson, Mary, 38 Garcia, David, 55 Bergenthal, Jeff, 68, 70 Davies, Amanda, 67 Garibay, Ivan, 15 Berking, Peter, 26 Davis, Bert, 98 Garibay, Ozlem, 15 Bickley, William, 23 De Rivecourt, Michel, 110 Garrity, Mike, 111 Biddle, Elizabeth, 71 Deakins, Richard, 73 Garrity, Pat, 33, 34, 104 Bink, Martin, 10, 20, 66 Dean, Courtney, 25, 64 Gaska, James, 83 Binsch, Olaf, 39 Deibler, Nina, 51 Gaughen, Richard, 109 Bitoun, Ariane, 92 DeJong, Steven, 35 Gaugler, Elizabeth, 99 Blake, Lea, 51 DeVrijer, Jur, 33 Gaul, Lawrence, 105 Blake-Plock, Shelly, 57 Diaz, Maria, 51 Gavin, Michael, 64 Bolton, Amy, 9, 31, 108 Diedrich, Frederick, 25 Georgiopoulos, Michael, 15 Boonekamp, Rudy, 33 Diego, Manuel, 98 Gilbert, Stephen, 107 Bosa, Romain, 92 Diemunsch, Jonathan, 111 Goldberg, Benjamin, 52 Boyce, Michael, 52 DiGiovanni, Frank, 24 Gordon, Steven, 73 Bradshaw, Jeffrey, 31 Dill, Kevin, 16 Grace, Paul, 50 Branzoi, Vlad, 29, 58, 77 DiPilla, Muchael, 59 Graddy, Courtney, 45 Brent, Linda, 107 Dominguez, Jose, 31 Graham, Cathy, 38 Bridgman, Thomas, 99 Dominguez, Manny, 38 Granger, Douglas, 105 Brimstin, Jay, 9, 13 Drake, David, 68 Graniela, Benito, 85 Brock, Timothy, 14 Drzymala, Natalie, 107 Grechkin, Timofey, 47 Brooks, Conner, 104 Dumanoir, Paul, 68, 81, 89, 100 Gregg, Brian, 89 Brookshire, Jonathan, 29 Dunne, Robb, 101 Grippin, Burt, 68, 81 113 Papers are available on the 2010 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. Limited numbers of single year copies of 1998-2009 are available. All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium (order form at the back of this book). Individual papers may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts Grubb, Jefferson, 9 Guarino, Sean, 96 Gunter, Stephen, 53 Haag, Jason, 26 Hackett, Matthew, 78 Hadley, Steven, 83 Hallenbeck, Phil, 82 Hannachi, Tahar, 92 Hao, Jianping, 95 Harrison, Devin, 51 Harrs, Shawn, 71 Harvey, Edward, 17 Harvey, Robert, 41 Haynes, Jacqueline, 59 Hernandez, Gabriela, 40 Hester, Toumnakone, 13 Hieb, Michael, 27 Hill, Susan, 55 Hines, Karl, 89 Hoang, Tuan, 105 Hodges, Glenn, 24 Hoebbel, C, 106 Hoffman, Robert, 31 Hogan, Christopher, 22 Holden, Heather, 18 Holmes, Chris, 68 Holt, Lisa, 59 Holub, Joseph, 39 Holutiak, Jason, 33, 34 Hou, Ming, 87 Houston, Rebecca, 54 Hruska, Michael, 41 Hubal, Robert, 15 Hulme, Kevin, 54 Humm, Laura, 37 Humphrey, Elliot, 111 Hurter, Jonathan, 103 Hutchinson, Charles, 105 Hyland, Jessie, 26 Ianni, Steve, 95 Ingmundson, Paul, 38 Ingraham, Lorie, 51 Isaksen, Geir, 22 Ison, David, 47 Izzetoglu, Kurtulus, 40 Jackson, Cullen, 111 Jackson, James, 72 James, David, 10, 66 Jang, Jihyun, 91 Johnson, Mark, 86 Johnston, Joan, 18, 109 Johnstone, Michael, 30 Jones, Nathan, 12, 101 Jones, Randolph, 31 Jones, Tom, 24 Jorden, Neil, 37 Joseph, Jeremy, 85 Kapadia, Amit, 68 Karwowski, Waldemar, 99 Kaste, Katherine, 35, 108 Kawatsu, Chris, 15 114 Keeney, Michael, 9, 111 Keller-Glaze, Heidi, 23 Khan, Burhan, 30 Khimeche, Lionel, 92 Kilcullen, Tara, 41 Kilgore, Ryan, 22 Killilea, John, 87 Kim, Hee-Soo, 91 Kim, Jungyoon, 91 Kist, Richard, 74 Kleissas, Dean, 11 Knapp, Michael, 62 Knarr, Kenneth, 63, 65 Knott, Camilla, 25 Knox, Alan, 91 Ko, Li-Wei, 66 Kopyi, Antoni, 60 Koscielniak, Michael, 89 Kreutzer, Christine, 55 Kumar, Rakesh, 29, 58, 77 Lacerenza, Christina, 77 Lackey, Stephanie, 103 Lai, Peng-Wen, 66 LaPorta, Anthony, 105 LaViola, Joseph, 43, 104 Le, Vu, 30 Lea, Mark, 105 Leary, Mark, 93 Lee, Sangjin, 91 Leigeber, Daniel, 89 LeSueur, Kenneth, 94 Levesque, Jerome, 39 Lewis, Bridgette, 57 Lewis, Mark, 75 Li, Xingxin, 95 Lim, Teng Howe, 21 Lin, Chin-Teng, 66 Lin, Shih-Chuan, 66 Lipkin, Ilya, 76 Little, Anne, 49 Lloyd, Charles, 83 Long, Rodney, 26, 41 Luotsinen, Linus, 87 Lutz, Robert, 11 Macdonald, B, 106 Mallett, L, 106 Maraj, Crystal, 103 Marinier, Bob, 15 Marlow, Shannon, 77 Marshall, Henry, 89, 100 Maxwell, Douglas, 83, 103 Mayor, Marco, 75 Mazzeo, Mark, 77 McAlinden, Ryan, 47 McClain, Jonathan, 56 McCoy, Sean, 38 McDonnell, Joseph, 98 McEwen, Timothy, 22 McIlwain, Steve, 78, 105 McLaughlin, Robert, 53 McLaughlin, Ryan, 81 McLean, Angus, 60 McMillan, Mathew, 91 McNamara, Jennifer, 50, 57 McNeely, Danielle, 17 Medford, Ashley, 41 Megiveron, Michael, 48 Meijer, Johan, 110 Meinshausen, Donald, 79 Merchant, Chirag, 97 Metcalf, David, 77 Meyer, Christophe, 87 Michael, Tomer, 88 Milham, Laura, 102 Miller, Duncan, 8 Miller, John, 20 Millich, Sean, 94 Minkov, Yaniv, 88 Mizelle, John, 89 Moloff, Alan, 105 Monday, Paul, 80 Mondesire, Sean, 83 Moore, Ronald, 86 Morris, Karen, 54 Muller, Tijmen, 33 Munro, Jaeson, 86 Murphy, Jennifer, 41 Murray, Glenn, 58 Nauer, Kevin, 56 Nelson, John, 107 Nelson, Susan, 17 Neville, Kelly, 108 Newton, Carolyn, 41 Newton, Charles, 87 Nguyen, Vivian, 30 Nicholson, Denise, 31 Niehaus, James, 96 Nolan, Margaret, 109 Noordkamp, Wouter, 35 Norton, Heather, 17 Novak, Ana, 30 O’Connor, Michael, 94 O’Grady, Ryan, 31 Oden, Kevin, 40 Ogreten, Sherry, 103 Oh, Sangyoon, 69 Ohlman, James, 93 Olsen, Dale, 37 Oroszi, Terry, 38 Oskiper, Taragay, 29, 77 Padron, Christina, 111 Pappada, Scott, 28 Park, Samjoon, 91 Parkes, David, 79 Parsons, Doug, 73 Patel, Upesh, 53 Pearson, Jeff, 53 Pelaez, Juan, 85 Perez, Manuela, 45 Pettitt, Beth, 36 Pharmer, James, 102 Phillips, Jennifer, 63, 65 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. 2015 I/ITSEC Abstracts Phillips, Kelley, 40 Phipps, Eric, 109 Plew, William, 51 Pokorny, Robert, 59 Poltrack, Jonathan, 42 Poppinga, Gerald, 87 Powers, Johnny, 62 Priest, Heather, 9, 35 Priselac, Nancy, 17 Priselac, Stephen, 17 Puglisi, Matthew, 64 Punihaole, Tom, 94 Pynadath, David, 55, 97 Quinn, Stephanie, 111 Ratwani, Krista, 25 Raybourn, Elaine, 24 Read, Luke, 77 Rediger, Scott, 60 Reed, Dean, 101 Regan, Damon, 41 Reini, Seth, 31 Reitz, Emilie, 19, 61 Reynolds, James, 32 Riddle, Christian, 9 Riecken, Mark, 90 Rijken, Roel, 87 Roberts, Timothy, 33, 34 Robinson, Douglas, 105 Robson, Robby, 71 Rodriquez, Jose, 73 Roessingh, Jan Joris, 87 Roos, Christopher, 110 Rosick, Mary, 95 Ross, Karol, 63, 65 Roth, John, 73 Rutledge, John, 90 Sadagic, Amela, 73 Saffold, Jay, 33, 34 Salas, Eduardo, 18 Salcedo, Julie, 103 Samarasekera, Supun, 29, 58, 77 Sanchez, Jamie, 85 Sanders, Brian, 93 Schaffer, Richard, 29, 77 Schatz, Sae, 19 Scheidt, David, 11 Schnell, Tom, 60 Scott, Rosalyn, 38 Seavers, Greg, 12, 73 Sege, Stephen, 103 Seltzer, Robert, 17, 71 Serge, Stephen, 101 Service, Katherine, 31 Sessoms, Pinata, 31 Sewnath, Ghanshaam, 110 Shepherd, Jill, 19 Shih, Yi-Cheng, 66 Shoaf, Tovar, 33, 34 Shute, Valerie, 62 Siddiqui, Abdul, 17, 71 Siegfried, Robert, 28 Silva, Austin, 56 Sinatra, Anne, 18 Sivo, Stephen, 101 Sizintsev, Mikhail, 77 Smit, Selmar, 35 Smith, Craig, 32 Smith, Eileen, 17 Smith, Gary, 98 Smith, Matthew, 37 Smith, Michael, 62 Smith, Robert, 48 Smith, Roger, 45, 105 Smith, Todd, 47 Soh, Boon Kee, 21 Sotomayor, Teresita, 49 Sottilare, Robert, 18, 43, 52, 104 Soyler Akbas, Asli, 99 Sprinkle, Ronald, 62 Stacy, Webb, 9 Starsman, Scott, 43 Stensrud, Brian, 87 Stevens, Denise, 14 Stevens, Jonathan, 83, 97, 101 Stilman, Boris, 101 Stodd, Julian, 19 Suma, Evan, 47 Surpris, Glenn, 111 Tan, Kia Hong, 21 Tanaka, Alyssa, 45, 105 Terwilliger, Brent, 47, 93 Thiele, Luke, 111 Tosh, Andrew, 85 Toubman, Armon, 87 Tracey, Luke, 30 Tran, Hung, 84 Tripp, Lisa, 111 Truong, Jeff, 89, 100 Tucker, Christina, 93 Tucker, Jennifer, 25 Turcanik, Michal, 87 Uhl, Elizabeth, 10, 66 Ukwa, Jennifer, 19 Umanskiy, Oleg, 97, 101 Uphoff, Bruce, 89 Valaitis, John, 102 Van de Pal, Jelke, 110 Van den Berg, Tom, 28 Van der Poel, Nick, 35 VanDuyne, Christopher, 44 VanLent, Mike, 15 Vasquez, Sara, 58 Veazanchin, Sergiu, 104 Ventrone, Fred, 94 Viklund, Erica, 111 Vincenzi, Dennis, 47 Vitovitch, Nicholas, 58 Vogel-Walcutt, Jennifer, 65 Vogt, Brian, 48 Voshell, Martin, 22 Walton, Jamiahus, 107 Walwanis, Melissa, 9, 35, 108 Wang, Lubin, 62 Wang, Ning, 55, 97 Washburn, Nick, 41 Wedel, Douglas, 76 Wells, David, 11 Wells, Robert, 89, 100 Werk, Lloyd, 51 Werner, Anna, 58 Weyhrauch, Peter, 96 Wiggins, Sterling, 9, 111 Williams, Logan, 83 Willianson, Brian, 104 Willoughby, Mike, 81 Willson, Brad, 105 Wilson, Bradley, 78 Wilson, Elizabeth, 53 Wilson, Tom, 93 Winer, Eliot, 39, 107 Winner, Jennifer, 13 Winslow, Brent, 111 Winterbottom, Marc, 83 Winters, John, 102 Witcher, Ken, 93 Wittman, Robert, 68, 81 Wolverton, Michael, 58 Wray, Robert, 35 Wysocki, Tim, 51 Xu, James, 62 Yang, Meng-Shun, 66 Yang, Minsoo, 69 Yang, Xu, 95 Yarnall, Louise, 58 Yates, Floy, 73 Ye, Fei, 95 Young, David, 22 Zhao, Weinan, 62 Zheng, Weimin, 31 Zhu, Zhiwei, 58 Zou, Cliff, 75 Papers are available on the 2015 I/ITSEC CD ROM included in the Conference Attendee meeting bag, or visit the I/ITSEC 115 Website (www.iitsec.org) for ordering information. (Limited numbers of CDs from 1998-2014 are also available.) All papers from 1966 through 2000 are available in the I/ITSEC Compendium. Individual papers from 1966 through 2015 may also be ordered through the www.iitsec.org portal. Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference The National Training and Simulation Association (NTSA) An Affiliate of the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Suite 400, 2111 Wilson Boulevard • Arlington, VA 22201 http://www.iitsec.org • (703) 247-2569
Similar documents
Army Looks to Training Center Upgrades
Malone said that the past 12 years of war had seen a shift in CTC focus to preparing units for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In most cases, that translated to wide area security missio...
More information