technology trends and developments approaches and use in defense planning technology trends and...
TRANSCRIPT
Technology Trends and Developments
Approaches and Use in Defense Planning
Technology Trends and Developments
Scientific Support for the Decision Making in the Security Sector, NATO Advanced Research Workshop,21-25 October 2006, Velingrad Bulgaria
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments2
Strategic Policy‘Thinking about the future’
Defense Strategy,
National Security&
IntelligenceMethodologies andDomain knowledge
Context analysis
Technology assessment
Defense Strategy
Changing environment, Operations,
Means
Assessment of developments,
Options
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments3
Strategic Security Policy Requirements
What?
What?
What?
Ambitions (Foreign & National
Security Policy aims)
Which?T
ransform
ation P
olicy &
processe
s road
ma
ps
What?
How?
How?
How?
Future World prospects
Threat appreciation
Scenario’s
Objective Force or Security
capabilities
Legacy Forcecapabilities
Technology developments
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments4
Essential capabilities
+ +++++ = Military or Security capability
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments5
Models
Models Models
Models
Tech
nolo
gy a
rea
Knowledge area Functionality Tech
nolo
gy a
rea
Syste
ms
Kn
ow
led
geare
a
Capabilities
Technologie watch assessment and forecast
Military or Security
Implications
Transformation Objective Area’s
System Concepts
Operational concepts
Cou
ntry
ob
jectiv
esConcept development
Strategy
VisieAmbitions
Context
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments6
Approaches Technology Watch Assessment and Foresight
• Regular national Research & Development for Defense and Security• Watch and forecast• Assessment of usefulness• Concept Development and Experimentation• Operational testing• In-use evaluation and Lessons Learned
• International collaboration (examples)• Bi-, Tri- and multilateral co-operation• NATO-RTO panels and Task Groups• NATO C3 Agency• European Defence Agency• EU 7th Framework Programme
Bra
in M
achi
ne
Inte
rfac
ing
Wir
eles
s C
om
Directed energy
Weapons
ICT
- A
gent
s
Hybrid m
aterials
Usefulness for Defense and Security
Res
eacr
h pr
ogra
mes
Assessment
Developments
Basics Technology Watch, Assessment & Foresight
New
tech
nolo
gies
Disruptive technology
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments7
Which are the Disruptive Technologies?
"A disruptive technology in the realm of defence and security represents :
• a technological development which• significantly changes the rules or conduct of conflict within one or too generations
• and forces the planning process to adapt it and to change the long term goals".
Disruptive Technologies, - widening the scope -,Klaus Ruhlig, Uwe Wiemken, Fraunhofer INT, April 2006
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments8
Technical Innovations and Goal Finding Necessary Dialogue between Soldiers and Technicians
TechnologicalPotential Analysis
TechnologicalThreat Analysis
Top-down
Strategic Goals
Research and Technology
Bottom-up
Requirem
ent
Pull
Technology
Push
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments9
(Disruptive) Technologies
Clustered in Themes
Doctrines
Idea of Systems Definition
Theme Theme Theme Theme Theme Theme
Technology Integration
Technology Insertion
Disruptive Technology Assessment
Game (DTAG)
TechnologyAssessmentSummary
Conference
Methodology
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments10
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
3. Readiness of the technology
TRL: 4 ------>>> ORANGE
This technology has already TRL 9 products but they do not reach the performance required for this capability. One direction allows independency of speaker but limited to a set of words in a controlled environment (for instance call center). Other approaches require speaker training the system to increase the recognition rate. In both cases error rate is high overall when noisy environments and use of different accents and dialects.
• The technology by itself can be easily derived into a system? Yes for example into translator.
• If the technology is mature/ready, does it need further time (integrated into a system of systems for instance) to deliver the promised capability ? It can be part of system of systems as well such as intelligence COMMINT.
• An estimation of time to a system delivering the capability described.
Presently there are systems delivering the capability with very limited performance. To full capability, 5-10 years.
Processing power, linguistics and semantics knowledge, and algorithms need to be improved.
Hazards
• How easy is for an enemy to develop the technology (availability of critical knowledge, know-how, primary sources, industrial base...etc):
It is not easy, but the question is if the enemy will need it.
• How easy (and fast) is for an enemy to develop countermeasures against the technology/capability (availability of critical Knowledge, know-how, primary sources, industrial base...etc).
Easy and fast , many ways such as crypted speech, codes, hand language, distorted language, faking accents, mixed languages.
T - 001
Technology Name: SPEECH RECOGNITIONLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Which capability does the technology enable?
This technology allows to transform speech into text with independency of speaker, noise environment, language and without need of training.
• Does it enable an identified capability gap?
The need for fluent communications in the operational field with the civil population.
For intelligence purposes there is also the need to transform huge amount of Voice communications into text for later analysis.
• Is it also a cross-pollinating technology? Yes, can be applied to Human Machine Interfaces.
2. Operational limits of the enabled capabilityRegional dialects, uncommon accents, extremely noise environment (battlefield fire), concurrency of more than one speaker at the same time.If there is not an specific sound enhancer (directional microphone, sound amplifier...) distance between the source and the receiver should be no more than a meter. • Which characteristics that can be found in the scenario(s) of application can limit the performance of operation? Battlefield fire, strong winds, airport noise.
?
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments11
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational state:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of training.
• Limitations:
Regional dialectsUncommon accentsExtremely noise environment (battlefield fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same time.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Systems:Portable dictionaries Portable devices with the most common frases (text to voice)Human translators.
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector very active in speech recognition (IBM VOICETYPE, DRAGON..) and Text2Text translators including ontology issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-held device that translates bidirectionally spoken speech from a set of languages to a chosen language (speech and text). It also captures images with written text in any of the languages of the set and translate its meaning. It can storage as text all the translations for a later analysis.
• Operational capability concerned by the IoS: Soldiers in external operations.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobust (sand, water, dust, cold)Autonomy to at least 24 hours of operationFull operative day and nightThe system must be modular so it can upgraded with more languagesReal time systemPlatform/Unit
• Expected effects:Increase the understanding and situational awareness of the soldier.
Improve the relations with civil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological condition of the soldier.Increase operational tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or doctrines: No need of language training. Improvement of peace keeping operations performance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments12
4. Technologies
• Technologies, which contributions are determining in the operational performance of the IoS.
- Speech recognition - Tcard number 0001- Text2Text translators- Ontology systems- Optical character recognition- Digital voice signal processing- Linguistics- Computing power- Power supply- Input capture devices
• Compatibility of the technologies:
All technologies in the system are compatible in functionality and within 5-10 years also in readiness.There is not incompatibility with other systems.
8. Studies and references
• DARPA STUDIES, IBM , EU FRAMEWORK PROGRAMS
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translator
6. Affordability
• Great powers to develop the device
• Small powers can acquire the product.
7. Acceptability
Very dual system.
Civil sector will adopt it and eventually drive the development and cost of it.
8. Training requirements
No specific training
5. Critical Points
• Major risks in case of development.
While development:
- Any of the key technologies, such as speech recognition, does not reach the expected performance.- Understanding of speech ontologies in order to make translations reliable.- Cost of development
While fielding:
- Weight- Autonomy- Ease of use- Robustness- Cost
Land XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
SAS WG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments13
T-Cards and IoS-Cards relations
T-Cards IoS-Cards
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments14
Disruptive Technology Assessment Game (DTAG) setting
Table
Technology group
Table
Analyst group
Table
Military group
Table Table
Ops floor group
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments15
Disruptive Technology Assessment Game (DTAG)
Table
Technology group
Table
Analyst group
Table
Military group
Table Table
Ops floor group
4 R
equi
rem
ent f
or n
ew Io
S
2 Io
S Car
d Pl
ayed
1 Played an Mil O
rder
3 Playing the Game
5 Results analysed
4a E
xtra
new
IoS
Car
d
• Scenario is used as high level context• Tasks that can be performed or
countered using technology?• Forces are always played by Red and
Blue group
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments16
Game scenario
Scenario requirements• Necessary for Context• Micro-scenario’s with disposition of brigade and
batallion equivalents• Different (multiple) parties involved• High tech and Low tech elements• Geography elements (deserts, bush, flat land, water)
Basis for micro-scenario’s:
Zoran Sea Crisis (NATO School Oberammergau)• Warring Factions• Regular/Irregular
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments17
Analysis method
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the most common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, D RAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at least 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the mos t common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, DRAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at leas t 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the mos t common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, DRAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at leas t 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the mos t common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, DRAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at leas t 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the mos t common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, DRAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at leas t 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the mos t common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, DRAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at leas t 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
SAS TG-062 “Assessment of Technologies with a disruptive effect on Defence and Security”
2. Critical Performances of the IoS
• Levels of performance involving an operational st ate:
Independency of speaker Noise environment Any language Without need of traini ng.
• Limit ations:
Regional di alec tsUncommon accentsExtr emel y noise envir onment ( battl efiel d fire)Concurrency of more than one speaker at the same ti me.
3. State of Art of the operational capability concerned by the IoS
• Current Syst ems:Portable dic tionaries Portable devices with the mos t common frases (text to voice)Human translators .
• Programs in progress:
DARPA programs: GALE, BABYLON, TIDES
Civil sector ver y acti ve i n speech recogni tion (IBM VOIC ETYPE, DRAGON ..) and Text2Text transl ators i ncluding ontolog y issues.
I - 001
Idea of System: Portable translatorLand XNavyAir
Urban XAsymmetric X
1. Description and Operational Interest
• The Portable Translator is composed by a hand-hel d device that tr ansl ates bi directi onall y spoken speech from a set of l anguages to a chosen l anguage (speech and text) . I t also captur es i mages with written text i n any of the l ang uag es of the set and tr ansl ate its meaning. It can storag e as text all the tr anslations for a l ater anal ysis .
• Operational capabil it y concerned by the IoS: Sol diers i n external oper ati ons.
• Conditions of use: Portable deviceRobus t (sand, water, dus t, col d)Autonomy to at leas t 24 hours of oper ati onFull operati ve day and nightThe sys tem must be modular so i t can upgraded with more l anguagesReal ti me systemPlatfor m/U nit
• Expected eff ect s:Incr ease the unders tanding and situational awareness of the soldi er.Improve the rel ations with ci vil indigenous population.Improve of the psychological conditi on of the soldi er.Incr ease operati onal tempo
• Possible indirect impacts on other operational capabilities or d octr ines:
No need of l anguage trai ning. Improvement of peace keepi ng operati ons per for mance
PORTABLE TRANSLATOR
SPEECH
TEXT
IMAGES WITH WRITTEN TEXT
SPEECH
TEXT
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
ANY LANGUAGE OF THE SET (INCLUDING NATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE SOLDIER)
Scenario
Vignets/Snapshots
Incident list TasksTasks
TasksTasks
Tasks
Incident listIncident list
Incident listIncident list
Vignets/SnapshotsVignets/Snapshots
Vignets/Snapshots
Strategic Assessment
Scenario
Vignets/Snapshots
Incident list TasksTasks
TasksTasks
Tasks
Incident listIncident list
Incident listIncident list
Vignets/SnapshotsVignets/Snapshots
Vignets/Snapshots
Strategic Assessment
Scenario
Vignets/Snapshots
Incident list TasksTasks
TasksTasks
Tasks
Incident listIncident list
Incident listIncident list
Vignets/SnapshotsVignets/Snapshots
Vignets/Snapshots
Strategic Assessment
Scenario
Vignets/Snapshots
Incident list TasksTasks
TasksTasks
Tasks
Incident listIncident list
Incident listIncident list
Vignets/SnapshotsVignets/Snapshots
Micro-scenarios’
Strategic Assessment
Micro-scenario
Overall scenario
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments18
Ops floor groups
• Total of 10 Mil Air, Land and Maritime Experts G2, G3, G4, G9, Spec Ops (LtCol/Maj)
• Red and Blue team• Experts in Tasking, Planning and Execution• NATO or National resources
TableTable
• 3/5 Military experts (Col/LtCol)• Joint services oriented• NATO or National resources• General oversight• Policy: National/NATO• Media: CNN factor• Chair is also Mil Referee
TableMilitary group
• Operations Analysis Experts (Tech & Mil)• 1 person at the table• 2-4 with the both teams
TableAnalyst group
• Technological theme representatives• They will try to estimate the possible
maturity and applicability in time frame 5-10 and 10-20 years
• These people have to be creative• They develop extra IoS cards on
requirements from Ops teams (Wild cards)• Chair is also Tech Referee
TableTechnology group
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments19
1 cycle game
Table
Table
1 hr CoA & Card assessment
Micro scenario
+Cards
+RoE+
Orbatas a Start
Input DTAG
TARTAN archives first impressions
Table
Briefing to Milgp, 5 min
Briefing to Milgp, 5 min
Table
TARTAN total archiving
Table
Table Table
Table
Confrontation analysis3 hrs
Moderator
Mil & Techg gp support
Mil & Techg gp support
Table
2,5 hr debrief & extra inputIn TARTAN
Table
Table
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments20
Foreseen results
• List of Technologies• Maturity• Timeline
• List of Ideas of Systems• Maturity• Timeline
• List of possible disruptive technologies• Usefulness for tasks• Ranking
• Total is input for Defense planning
What?
What?
What?
Ambitions (Foreign Security
Policy aims)
Which?
Transform
ation Policy
& processes roadm
aps
What?
How?
How?
How?
Future World prospects
Threat appreciation
Scenario’s
Objective Force
capabilities
Legacy Forcecapabilities
Technology developments
23 October 2006, Velingrad, BulgariaTechnology Trends and Developments21
J.G.M. (Michel) Rademaker MTL
Email: [email protected] TNO Defence Security and Safety (www.tno.nl)Programme director National Security and IntelligenceSecretary Clingendael Centre for Strategic Studies (www.ccss.nl) Oude Waalsdorperweg 632509 JG The HagueThe Netherlands Tel: +31 (0)703740139Mob: +31 (0)624686023Fax: +31 (0)70 3740642 ?