This paper presents a modeling method to demonstrate engagement-level military simulation which includes few combat objects, or entities. To this end, the paper, on the basis of the discrete event system specification (DEVS) formalism, centers on two ideas: (1) a combat entity’s model structure at the composition level; and (2) behavioral delineation of the entity’s elementary component. In detail, we classify the combat entity model into platform and weapon models and create six groups of the model categorized by two dimensions: three activities and two abstractions. And the elementary component in the group interprets an engagement scenario as a flow of executable tasks, which are expressed by DEVS semantics. The stated structures and semantics provide intuitive appeal, reducing the effort required to read and understand the model’s behavior. From the combat experiments, we can gain interesting experimental results regarding engagement situations employing underwater weapons and their tactical operations. Finally, we expect that this work will serve an immediate application suited to various engagement situations.
UpadhyaKSSrinivasanNK. A simulation model for availability under battlefield situations. Simulation2000; 74: 332–339.
2.
SmithRD. Essential techniques for military modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings of the 1998 winter simulation conference, Washington, DC, December 13–16, 1998, pp.805–812.
3.
PiplaniLKMercerJGRoopRO. Systems acquisition manager’s guide for the use of models and simulations. Report of the DSMC 1993–1994. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Systems Management College Press, 1994.
4.
TingSPZhouS. Dealing with dynamic changes in time critical decision-making for MOUT simulations. Comput Anim Virtual Worlds2009; 20: 427–436.
5.
LiangKHWangKM. Using simulation and evolutionary algorithms to evaluate the design of mix strategies of decoy and jammers in anti-torpedo tactics. In: Proceedings of the 2006 winter simulation conference, Monterey, CA, December 3–6, 2006, pp.1299–1306.
6.
KarasakalO. Air defense missile-target allocation models for a naval task group. Comput Oper Res2008; 35: 1759–1770.
7.
TolkA. Engineering principles of combat modeling and distributed simulation. New Jersey: Wiley, 2012.
8.
WingJM. A specifier’s introduction to formal methods. Computer1990; 23(9): 8–24.
9.
FranceREvansALanoK. The UML as a formal modeling notation. Comput Stand Interfaces1998; 19: 325–334.
10.
BohnenkampHD’ArgenioPRHermannsH. MODEST: A compositional modeling formalism for hard and softly timed systems. IEEE Trans Software Eng2006; 32: 812–830.
11.
ZeiglerBP. Multi-facetted modeling and discrete event simulation. Academic Press, 1984.
12.
HillRHMillerJOMcIntyreGA. Applications of discrete event simulation modeling to military problems. In: Proceedings of the 2001 winter simulation conference, Arlington, VA, December 9–12, 2001, pp.780–788.
13.
SungCHHongJHKimTG. Interoperation of DEVS models and differential equation models using HLA/RTI: hybrid simulation of engineering and engagement level models. In: Proceedings of the 2009 spring simulation multi-conference, San Diego, CA, March 22–27, 2009, pp.387–392.
14.
HongJHSeoKMSeokMG. Interoperation between engagement-and engineering-level models for effectiveness analyses. J Defense Model Simul2011; 8(3): 143–155.
15.
SeoKMHongJHKimTG. DEVS-based underwater warfare simulation development for effectiveness analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2010 summer simulation multi-conference, Ottawa, ON, Canada, July 11–15, 2010.
16.
SeoKMSongHSKwonSJ. Measurement of effectiveness for an anti-torpedo combat system using a discrete event systems specification-based underwater warfare simulator. J Defense Model Simul2011: 8(3): 157–171.
17.
AndrienKCaussanelJGiambiasiN. DEVS model for CGF scenario. In: Proceedings of the 17th IMACS world congress, Paris, France, July 11–15, 2005.
18.
MorenoATorreLRisco-MartinJL. DEVS-based validation of UAV path planning in hostile environments. In: Proceedings of the international defense and homeland security simulation workshop, Vienna, Austria, September 19–21, 2012, pp.135–140.
19.
ChoDYSonMJKangJH. Analysis of a submarine’s evasive capability against an antisubmarine warfare torpedo using DEVS modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings of the 2007 spring simulation multi-conference, San Diego, CA, March 25–29, 2007, pp.307–315.
20.
ParkSCKwonYSeongK. Simulation framework for small scale engagement. Comput Ind Eng2010; 59: 463–472.
HoYC. Introduction to special issue on dynamics of discrete event systems. Proc IEEE1989; 77(1): 3–6.
23.
PageEHSmithR. Introduction to military training simulation: a guide for discrete event simulationists. In: Proceeding of the 1988 winter simulation conference, Washington, DC, December 13–16, 1998, pp.53–60.
24.
ZeiglerBPPraehoferHKimTG. Theory of modeling and simulation. 2nd ed.Academic Press, 2001.
25.
ZeiglerBPVahieS. DEVS formalism and methodology: unity of conception/diversity of application. In: Proceedings of the 1993 winter simulation conference, Los Angeles, CA, December 12–15, 1993, pp.573–579.
26.
ZeiglerBPFultonDNutaroJ. M&S enabled testing of distributed systems: Beyond interoperability to combat effectiveness assessment. In: The 9th annual modeling and simulation workshop, December 8–11, 2003.
27.
HongGPKimTG. A framework for verifying discrete event models within a DEVS-based system development methodology. Trans Soc Comput Simul1996; 13(1): 19–34.
28.
PalaniappanSSawhneyASarjoughianH. Application of the DEVS framework in construction simulation. In: Proceedings of the 2006 winter simulation conference, Monterey, CA, December 3–6, 2006, pp.2077–2086.
29.
KwonSJSeoKMKimBS. Effectiveness analysis of anti-torpedo warfare simulation for evaluating mix strategies of decoys and jammers. Advanced methods, techniques, and applications in modeling and simulation. Springer, 2012.
30.
SeoKMSungCHKimTG. Realization of the DEVS formalism in matlab/simulink. In: Proceedings of the grand challenges in modeling and simulation, Edinburgh, Scotland, June 16–19, 2008, pp.251–256.
31.
Risco-MartınJLMittalSZeiglerBP. From UML state charts to DEVS state machines using XML. In: Proceedings of the workshop on multi-paradigm modeling: concepts and tools, Nashville, TN, September 30–October 5, 2007.
32.
BorlandSVangheluweH. Transforming statecharts to DEVS. In: Proceedings of the summer computer simulation conference, Montreal, Canada, July 20–24, 2003, pp.154–159.
33.
BarrosFJ. The dynamic structure discrete event system specification formalism. Trans Soc Comput Simul Int1996; 13(1): 35–46.
34.
ChowACH. Parallel DEVS: a parallel, hierarchical, modular modeling formalism and its distributed simulator. Trans Soc Comput Simul Int1996; 13(2): 55–68.
35.
HongJSSongHSKimTG. A real-time discrete event system specification formalism for seamless real-time software development. Discrete Event Dyn Syst1997; 7: 355–375.
36.
SungCHKimTG. Collaborative modeling process for development of domain-specific discrete event simulation systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev2012; 42: 532–546.
37.
KimTGSungCHHongSY. DEVSim++ toolset for defense modeling and simulation and interoperation. J Defense Model Simul2011; 8(3): 129–142.
WainerG. CD++: a toolkit to develop DEVS models. Software Pract Experience2002; 32: 1261–1306.
40.
RobinsonT. ODIN – an underwater warfare simulation environment. In: Proceedings of the 2001 winter simulation conference, Arlington, VA, December 9–12, 2001, pp.672–679.
41.
CanneySBestJCrampA. Virtual maritime system architecture description document issue 2.0. Virtual Maritime System Document, 2002.
42.
KercbnerRMHughesRG. TAC BRAWLER: an application of engagement simulation modeling to simulator visual system display for air combat maneuvering. In: Proceedings of the second symposium, April 25–28, 1983, pp.599–606.
43.
FongG. Adapting COTS games for military simulation. In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGGRAPH international conference on virtual reality continuum and its applications in industry, Singapore, June 15–18, 2004, pp.269–272.
44.
SungCHHongSYKimTG. Layered approach to development of OO war game models using DEVS framework. In: Proceedings of the summer computer simulation conference, Philadelphia, PA, July 24–28, 2005, pp.65–70.
45.
SongHSKimTG. DEVS diagram revised: a structured approach for DEVS modeling. In: Proceedings of European simulation conference, Hasselt, Belgium, October 25–27, 2010, pp.94–101.
46.
BakosG. Submarine approach and attack tactics – simulation and analysis. Masters Dissertation, Naval Postgraduate School, 1995.
47.
DenizFAlpdemirMKaraA. Supporting dynamic simulations with simulation modeling architecture (SiMA): a discrete event system specification-based modeling and simulation framework. Simulation: Trans Soc Comput Simul Int2012; 88: 707–730.
48.
KimTGParkSB. The DEVS formalism: hierarchical modular systems specification in S++. In: Proceedings of the 1992 European simulation multi-conference, York, UK, June 1–3, 1992, pp.152–156.
49.
BiggerstaffTJRichterC. Reusability framework, assessment, and directions. In: Software reusability. New York: ACM Press, 1989.
50.
ChoiYIKimTG. Reusability measure of DEVS simulation models in DEVSim++ environment. In: Proceedings of the AeroSense 97 conference on photonic quantum computing, Orlando, FL, April 20–25, 1997, pp.244–255.
