Joint Doctrine Ontology

From NCOR Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Joint Doctrine Ontology Project

Background of this project

This project is carried out under two Rome Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) initiatives MAMA" and "Living Plan".The project is directed by Barry Smith.


Peter Morosoff, Ron Rudnicki, Jason Bryant, Robert Farrell, Barry Smith, “Joint Doctrine Ontology: A Benchmark for Military Information Systems Interoperability”, Semantic Technology for Intelligence, Defense and Security (STIDS), 2015, forthcoming in CEUR.


The goal of this project is to create a formal representation of the content of (selected parts of) Doctrine.

Examples of potential uses

1. to doctrine authors:

- enabling the creation of flexible visualizations of how different parts of doctrine interact, or of doctrinal content relevant to particular types of operations or capabilities
- allowing a tracing of dependences between definitions that can help to ensure that changes in definitions cascade appropriately through all dependent definitions when revisions are made

2. to doctrine users:

- enabling more effective discovery of doctrinal knowledge in forms useful for computational reasoning
- providing for each term in the DoD Dictionary its own web page, serving as a repository of usage and of revision history,

3. in the form of new uses for the content of doctrine

- allowing the DoD Dictionary to serve as entry point for web-based searches across multiple repositories of authoritative data
- facilitating greater coordination of training and operations particularly as these involve IT systems working alongside human beings
- increasing automation of processes such as plan specification, ops assessment, BlueForce Status, and scenario development
- allowing new sorts of assessment processes, for example based on measures of adherence to doctrine, processes which may in turn give rise to new ways of computationally identifying areas where changes in doctrine may be needed

4. to facilitate communication

- for example between intelligence analysts and the warfighters who are users of intelligence data

The Joint Doctrine Ontology will provide a new source of ground truth for ontologists across DoD and IC that will help to identify gaps and errors in existing military ontologies. It will thereby support consistent agile ontology development of a sort that will counteract current tendencies towards silo-formation and failure of interoperation.

Work plan

The project will begin with a small number of modules focusing on:

1. Capstone (Task, Function and Mission) (JP 1)
2. Planning (JP 5-0)
3. Civil Operations (JP 3-57)
4. Space Operations (JP 3-14)
5. Air Mobility Operations (JP 3-17)
TBD: Operational Environment
TBD: Transport (4-01)
TBD: Sustainment

Initially we are focusing on

A. review of existing definitions to identify taxonomic relations.
B. exploring the role of Joint Doctrine and more specific doctrinal publications (for example the relation between the Joint Dictionary (JP 1-02) and the Army Doctrine Reference Publication 1-02, or between Joint Planning and Airforce Planning ([1])

Issues to be addressed:

Relation to existing efforts, especially:
See presentation here
The role of ontology fragments to be reused in different areas of doctrine, for example pertaining to PMESII-PT

Information on Joint Doctrine

Joint Electonic Library

Joint Doctrine Hierarchy

DoD Dictionary of Military Terms


CJCSI 5705.01D (10 November 2010) Standardization of Military and Associated Terminology, especially Enclosure C

Universal Joint Task List (UJTL)

Joint Doctrine Development Process

Joint Concept for Logistics

Jointness: A Selected Bibliography

Related efforts

JFACC Ontology

Acquisition Community Connection

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular 119: Federal Participation in Development and Use of Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities

U.S. Army Unified Land Operations, with Army Doctrine Reference Publication (ADRP) 1-02: Operational Terms and Military Symbol

Joint Capability Areas

National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)

Joint Information Environment (JIE)

DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF)

Data Services Environnent (DSE): DoDI 8320.02, “Sharing Data, Information, and Information Technology (IT) Services in the Department of Defense.”

Global Force Management (GFM)

GFM Data Initiative

Based on the authoritative guidance in the following issuances:

DoDI 8260.03: The Global Force Management Data Initiative (GFM DI)
DoD Manual (DoDM) 8260.03, Volume 1: The Global Force Management Data Initiative (GFM DI) Implementation: Unique Identification (UID) for GFM
DoDM 8260.03 Volume 2: Global Force Management Data Initiative (GFM DI) Implementation: The Organizational and Force Structure Construct (OFSC)


Making Plans Alive

Improving Coalition Planning by Making Plans Alive


The Downfall of Adaptive Planning

Marine Corps Planning Process

Thomas Cleary, Military Decision Making Process: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

Introduction to Plans and Orders

A Computational Framework for Living Plan Specification, Execution and Evaluation

Planning for Planners

PLANET: A Shareable and Reusable Ontology for Representing Plans

Shadow Planning

An Ontological Formalization of the Planning Task