Research Report /122

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT FOR THE

TACTICAL OPERATIONS SYSTEM (TOS)

Vector Research, Inc., and Perceptronics, Inc.

Oi

HUMAN FACTORS TECHNICAL AREA

LEF1I

U. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

t LL October 1979

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

80 3 18 014
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WILLIAM L. HAUSER

JOSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel, U S Army Technical Director Commander

Research accomplished under contract

to the Department of the Army

Vector Research, Inc. and Perceptronics, Inc.

4

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION Primary distribution of this report has been made by ARI. Plesa address correspondence

concerning distribution of reports to: U. S. Army Rlesearch Institute fr)r the Behavioral and Social Sciences,

ATTN PERI-P, 5001 Eisenhover Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333.

dISPOSITION: This report may be destroyed when it is no longer needed. Pleem do not return it to

the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

P The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official De•artment of the Army position,

unless so designated by other authorized documents.

L ... .... ... A.. -r
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE ("Ona Dstat EnteredO

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEOECMLEIGFR

1. REPORT NUMBER 12. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

Research Report 1228

4. TITLFE (and Subilae) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED / Final Report

_,fORMATIONUNGEMENT FOR THE 03CTICAL 3/15/78 - 5/15/79

7. AUTHOR(&)

S. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDREFSS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK

1I. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS //3 -- a0Rt79 7

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & AODRESS(II diffortwal from Controlttnd Offfc*) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of Athi report)

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral Unclassified

and Social Sciences (PERI-OS)1

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 223:33 IS&. DECL ASSI FICATION/ DOWNGRADING

I SCHEDULE -

IS. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved-for-public release; distribution unlimied

1LOST llIONSrArEMENT (of IR abotract enteted In Black '0.if different from Ropcr)4 /Wt

C~h~ ?1]~ L~oM olt'1

IS. SUPPLEM UTART NOTES

This effort was monitored by Dr. Edgar Johnson and Dr. Stanley Halpin,

Human Factors Technical Area, U.S. A, eseaQ)Instit othe

Behavioral and Social Sciences. lý "I ?t' t-o

19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reVere. id. Jinfeseawy and tden~blc~X*

Tactical Operations System (TOS) Standing Operating Procedures (SOP)

Data base management Information management

Information summarization Information storage and retrieval

'~Computers Mathematical modeling

Design aid

20. AC T sCnbe, - ,evm a"~ M nmeeow em ideritfy by block momibr)

~T~his executive summary presents synopses of three items resulting from

the first phase of a project to establish guidelines for a Standing Operating

Procedure (SOP) for managing information at the division level within the

Tactical operations System (TOS) , an automated staff-operations information

system. Two research products were developed, a provisional SOP and a TOS

design/decision aid model. ARI Technical Report 385, the third item, presents

the qualities found to be. characteristic of a "good" summary of battlefield

intelligence information. %

[ OPj47 EDTIONOFINOV511 SSOETEUnclassified

S ECURITV CLASSIFICATION OF THIS WAGE (When. Date Entered)
Research Report 1228

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT FOR THE

TACTICAL OPERATIONS SYSTEM (TOS)

Vector Research, Inc., and Perceptronics, Inc.

Submitted by:

Edgar M. Johnson, Chief

HUMAN FACTORS TECHNICAL AREA

Approved by:

Milton S. Katz, Acting Director

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

October 1979

Army Project Number TOS Information Management

2Q263743A774

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

iii
ARI Research Reports and Technical Reports are intended for sponsors of

R&D tasks and for other research and military agencies. Any findings ready

for implementation at the time of publication are presented in the last part

of the Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recommendations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military

agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

iv

I'I
FOREWORD

The Human Factors Technical Area is concerned with the demands of

the future battlefield for increased man-machine complexity to acquire,

transmit, process, disseminate, and utilize information. The research

is focused on interface problems and interactions within comiand and

control centers and is concerned with such areas as topographic products

and procedures, tactical symbology, user oriented systems, information

management, staff operations and procedures, and sensor systems integration and utilization.

One area of special interest is managing the flow of information

on the battlefield. Research results are used in defining preferred

staff operations and procedures to enable users to derive maximal benefit from automated information systems. The present publication provides a summary of the first phase of research to develop guidelines

for a Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) for information management

within the Tactical Operations System (TOS). Specific aspects of the

first phase research are described in more detail in the following

reports:

a. Guidelines for Information Management in the Tactical Operations System (TOS): Provisional Standing Operating Procedures

(SOP) (ARI Working Paper HF79-1).

b. A Design/Decision Aid for the Tactical Operations System (TOS)

(ARI Working Paper HF79-2).

c. Information Summarization in a Corps Level Scenario (ARI Technical Report 385).

Research in the area of information management is conducted as an

in-house effort augmented through contracts with organizations selected

for their unique capabilities and facilities for this research. The

present study was conducted by a government-contractor team with personnel from Vector Research, Inc. 1 And.Perceptronics, Inc., under contract

DAHC 19-78-rI1O27 with l5togram direction from Dr. Edgar M. Johnson.. .

_V7 -nm-ei iitersonnel who made substantial contributions include Dr. Stanley Halpin and Mr. Rex Michel of ARI, numerous individuals from the TOS

Manager's Office in the Combined Arms Combat Developments Activity 'i

(CACDA) at Fort Leavenworth, Kans., and personnel from the 3rd Armored

Division, Fort Hood, Tex. The Vector Research Inc. team was comprised

of Dr. Robert W. Blum (Project Leader), Mr. William D. Kinley (Assistant Project Leader)7-Ms. Cathleen A. Callahan, Mr. Mark•-?.-Graulich,

and Mr. GrayWitus. The Perceptronics team consisted of Mr. Michaif'G.

Samet and Dr. Ralph E. Geiselman.

V
This effort is responsive to requirements of Army Project

2Q263743A774, and to special requirements of the Combined Arms Combat

Development Activity, Fort Leavenworth, Kans. Special requirements are

contained in Human Resource Need 79-109 (Information Management with

the Tactical Operations System--TOS).

EPH ZEIDNER

Tchnical Director

Vi_
CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ................ .1-1

"2.0 SUMMARIES OF PRODUCTS AND RESULTS ..... .............. ... 2-1

2.1 Summary of Guidelines for Information Management in

the Tactical Operations System (TOS): Provisional

Standing Operating Procedures (SOP) ....... .......... 2-1

2.1.1 Introduction ..... ..... ............... .. 2-1

2.1.2 Overview of SOP Guidelines ...... ........... 2-2

2.1.3 Tailoring the SOP . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 2-6

2.2 A Design/Decision Aid for the Tactical Operations

System (TOS) ...... ......... ................... 2-6

2.2.1 Introduction ..... ... .................. ... 2-7

2.2.2 Background ..... ... .................. ... 2-7

2.2.3 Description of DDA Model .... ............ ... 2-8

2.2.3.1 Inputs to DDA .... ........... ..... 2-9

2.2.3.2 Outputs from DDA .... ............ ... 2-10

2.2.3.3 Queuing Network Representation

of the DCC ...... .............. .. 2-11

2.2.4 Application Activities ..... ... ............. 2-11

2.2.5 Future Directions ..... ................ ... 2-12

2.3 Summary of Information Summarization in a

Corps Level Scenario ..... ............... ...... 2-13

2.3.1 Introduction ..... ... ................. ... 2-13

2.3.2 Method ..... ..................... 2-15 2.3.3 Results and Discussion ... ............. 2-18

2.3.4 Conclusion ..... ..... ................ ... 2-20

3.0 DISTRIBUTION ..... ....... ... ....................... 3-1

i

vii

W o-- • .. .. .... ....- .......-•. • ,. .. ... ... . _ __... _,
r 1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The Tactical Operations System (TOS) is a battlefield computer system

for processing and storing information to be used by the Division commander

and his staff in support of tactical decision making. The large volumes

of information anticipated to be available to TOS through use of modern

data collection technology pose the potential of hardware and software

overloads for a system which must be constrained in size due to considerations such as the needs for mobility and low vulnerability. Coupling

this potential problem with the possibility of overloading the human users

of the system with an inordinate amount of information which they are

unable to assimilate led to the requirement for developing procedures for

managing the use of TOS and its data base.

The project was initiated under the assumption that a particular set

of standard operating procedures for information management in TOS would

be developed which, at the end of an anticipated three-year effort, could

be adopted with little change by any division employing TOS. During the

course of the first fourteen-month phase of the contract, that concept

has evolved into a more general, flexible, and hopefully even more useful

one. The present intention is to produce "guidelines" for SOP development, the guidelines to be used by the individual divisions to structure

TOS information management concepts to meet their own needs, and to

incorporate them into their respective division field SOP.

For this reason, the primary product of this project (summarized in

section 2.1 of this report) has been titled Guidelines for Information

-E
1-2

Management in the Tactical Operations System (TOS): Provisional Standing Operating Procedures (SOP) (ARI Working Paper HF79-1). That document will be further revised in subsequent phases of the project to

reflect the ongoing development of TOS and to incorporate results of

experiments, first with the TOS design/decision aid (introduced next),

then with TOS itself when it is available for testing. The final SOP

guidelines document will be in manual format and is intended to be used

in conjunction with the TOS users' manual (oriented to the specific

details of how to operate TOS, enter messages, etc.) and the "How to

Fight with TOS" manual (oriented to how best to use the information and

capabilities available with TOS in making decisions, preparing plans,

etc.). It should be re-emphasized that the SOP Guidelines manual is

intended to be used for the management of TOS and its data base.

The design/decision aid (DDA) for TOS, which is summarized in section 2.2 of this volume, has assumed a greater importance to the project

than was originally proposed. It was originally thought that a very simplified model (the DDA) of the effects of data loading and handling in

TOS could be developed in the first phase of the project in order to

minimize the amount of direct experimentation with TOS necessary to

evaluate the effects of various management policies. In the proposal,

it was assumed that a working version of TOS would be available for the

core experimental work relatively early in the project, at minimum, by

the beginning of the second phase. However, as events progressed, it

became evident that an operational TOS may not be ready unitil the third

phase of the project. For that reason, the TOS DDA has been developed

with a great degree of sophistication and flexibility to represent TOS
1-3

as it goes through its final stages of development. The DAA will be

the primary vehicle for developing and testing the management policies

and their parameters that will be contained in the final SOP guidelines.

Finally, section 2.3 contains a summary of the basic experimental

research on information summarization conducted during this project

phase. The original intent of concurrently carrying out research to fill

in gaps uncovered during the course of the SOP developmental work is

exemplified here. It became clear during the early part of the first

phase that there is a lack of knowledge on how best to summarize information sets. Specifically, the issue was how one should summarize

the data base or some portion of it for use during system "down times".

This led to issues such as how humans summarize information in general,

what constitutes a "good" summary, etc. The results of the research

inquiry which was undertaken will be incorporated in the refinement and

elaboration of the SOP guidelines in the next phase.

I

{a
2-1

2.0 SUMMARIES OF PRODUCTS AND RESULTS

This chapter presents summaries of the three reports produced during

the first phase of this project. The first, in section 2.1, explicitly

addresses the overall objective of the project -- to produce a selfcontained document of SOP guidelines. The second and third, in sections

2.2 and 2.3, present the results of efforts expended in support of

developing the SOP guidelines: section 2.2 describes a model of TOS

which will be used in future phases to evaluate the effect of management

policies of TOS, and section 2.3 presents the results of a research

effort that investigated certain aspects of information summarrization

which are pertinent to policies related to message summarization for

TOS.

2.1 SUMMARY OF GUIDELINES FOR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT IN THE TACTICAL

OPERATIONS SYSTEM (TOS): PROVISIONAL STANDING OPERATING

PROCEDURES soPL

2.1.1 INTRODUCTION

Information management procedures are required for TOS to maximize

the availability of information from the system and to prevent or circumvent the identified problems of system overload, storage overload,

and user overload. The methods suggested for preventing these overloaded

states involve both monitoring and controlling the system and the

system users.
2-2

The report does not contain an SOP, but provides both the guidelines

necessary for developing SOP for information management and recommendations

and rationale for specific SOP. It is written primarily for a task force

assigned to write a T03 SOP for its division, and provides direct input

to such an SOP as well as discussion of other management procedures

which would supplement or be supplemented by the development of operational

procedures for other TOS functions. Again, to clarify, the report

assumes the reader and user is familiar with TOS and its role in division

operations and, therefore, contains only that input which pertains to

inforr.ation management in TOS.

2.1.2 OVERVIEW OF SOP GUIDELINES

The topics addressed in the report have been identified as ones

which, if unmanaged, may contribute to inefficient utilization of

the TOS system. These topics have been organized into six qeneral areas

for purposes of developing guidelines for information management: (1)

an overall framework for management of TOS, (2) user guidelines, (3)

system management guidelines, (4) methods for monitoring and controlling

TOS, (5) file management guidelines, and (6) a guideline for operation

with a degraded system. The discussion given for each topic of concern

covers the reasons for developing management procedures, suggestions for

management procedures and their implications, and, where possible, example

procedures.

The TOS syste'n is mananed by the system controller (SYSCON)

and the file managers. The SYSCON acts as the overall manager
2-3 1

of information processing in TOS and resolves the conflicts between

the technical capabilities of TOS and the operational needs of the

users. A file manager's responsibility is to ensure that the contents

of the files delegated to him provide the maximum information value to

the file users. The SYSCON and file managers work together to maintain

both satisfactory operation of the system and the utility of the information stored in the system. The framework adopted in the manual, upon

which the management of the TOS system is based, is based on the concept

of a set of operating levels. This framework facilitates coordination of

procedures and communication among the SYSCON, the file managers, and

the TOS operators. Briefly, each user is provided a set of four operating levels, each of which is a set of constraints on his utilization of

the system. The constraints include such things as rates at which he may

update and query the data base. The constraints defining the levels range

from relaxed to restrictive, and the level at which an individual user

is instructed to operate the system is dependent on that user's need to

access the system, the system status, and the battlefield situation.

The SYSCON will appropriately change the operating level of users in

response to changes in system status, the user's need, and the battlefield

situation. An additional management tool, developed for use by the SYSCON

to minimize the task of changing individual user operating levels, is to group

users which are alike in terms of their utilization of the system and to control

their operating levels by groups. For example, users with similar demands

on TOS may be treated by the SYSCON as one group of users, and changes

made to tne operating level of the group apply to all members of the

L _ _ _
2-4

group. In addition, changes in group membership may occur during the

course of a battle. This grouping is for the convenience and efficiency

of the SYSCON, and individual users could be unaware of their qrouping.

A second area for which SOP guidelines have been developed concerns

the preparation of messages, primarily the definition of values for the

message fields which have no prescribed contents. The definitions

given for such fields should be easily understood and consistent with

other fields requiring such definitions and with those fields which have

similar context and whose field values are prescribed.

The third category of information management guidelines concerns

the use of the TOS information processing function. Control of the

utilization of queries and updates to the data base is maintained with

the use of operating levels. The other functions, specifically standing

requests for information (SRI), correlations, thresholds, and filters, are

managed by allotting to each user a specific number of such requests

which he may have present in the system at any time. Another concern

involving management of the processing function includes a tradeoff between the use of SRI and distribution lists (D/L) to obtain information.

D/L are useful for distributing those messages which satisfy relatively

permanent and known information needs while SRI provide the means.to

obtain those pieces of information for which an Immediate knowledge is

necessary. SRI may act as a substitute method for obtaining information

which may be otherwise received via a D/L, but the additional processing

time required by SRI may be detrimental to the operation of TOS if such

reliance is placed on SRI. Clearly, a tradeoff exists between these two

methods of distributing information.

Lt
2-5

The fourth area for information management concerns methods for

monitoring and controlling the TOS system. Methods for monitoring the

system include measurement of the TOS performance and the demands made

by the users on the system. Methods for controlling the system include

the use of operating levels, mentioned previously, filtering, hierarchical review#, and purging. The proposed methods for purging data from the

data base include automatic purging of records which relatively quickly

become obsolete; a routine purge which requireF periodic review of certain

types of messages to .be checked for possible deletion due to obsolescence;

or changes in the battlefield situation; and finally, "as required"

purges which may be necessary due to an increase in the demand for file

space, a degradation of the system status, etc. All these types of purging

are integrated as a means of managing the content and especially the size

of the data base.

The fifth category of information management procedures addresses the

unique problems of each file. These problems include an anticipated high

rate of interaction with the enemy situation data (ESD) file, interactions

between all files, and the establishment of both temporary and permanent

division-unique files through the use of the staff working file (SWF) option.

The final area for which SOP guidelines for information management

have been developed concerns the pro~essing of information during degraded modes of operation. Degraded modes include the loss of the use

of certain information-processing functions or a TOS physical device

due to hardware or software problems or combat damage. The shutdown of

the Division Computing Center (DCC) due to maintenance or displacement

Li -. POW
2-6

is systematically achieved by a grad~ial curtailment of users' interactions

with the system, reducing the operating levels, and prioritizing the final

information processing requirements. Likewise, successful restart of the

system is planned by a gradual increase in the demands placed on the

system. The guidance given for preparation for unplanned degradation

to the DCC includes summarization of various types of information which

are necessary for continued operation without TOS.

2.1.3 TAILORING THE SOP

The capability for individuals to tailor an SOP to meet their

specific needs has been a primary consideration during the development

of the SOP guidelines for information management. Each division and

units within the division are likely to have unique characteristics and

operating preferences. Therefore, alternative guidleines and variations

in management procedures are discussed under each topic presented in this

report where such tailoring capability is pertinent. It is envisioned

that the task force assigned to develop an explicit TOS SOP to augment the

unit's field SOP will use as a starting point the SOP guidelines for information management and the examples of specific SOP presented in the

report to develop an SOP which meets its unique needs.

2.2 A DESIGN/DECISION AID FOR THE TACTICAL OPERATIONS SYSTEM (TOS)
2-7

2.2. 1 INTRODUCTION

A design/decision aid (DDA) was developed to aid in the design and

evaluation of information management procedures for TOS. The DDA is a

mathematical model of the Division Computer Center (DCC). 1 The role of

the DDA is to estimate the impact of management procedures on the relia2 34 bility, responsiveness, and components of congestion4 of the DCC under

specified user demand loads.

Provided below is an overview of: (1) the background of the DDA,

(2) the description of the DDA, and (3) the anticipated future directions

of work with the DDA. This subject matter is presented in detail in

the full report.

2.2.2 BACKGROUND

In the fall of 1978, a preliminary version of a ODA was developed with

a fixed representation of the DCC hardware and software configuration,

and a fixed set of values of the parameters describing the processing

1The scope of work of the currently contracted effort did not extend beyond

the DCC to its peripherals or to the supporting communications nets.

2The system reliability can be thought of as having two components: (1)

the probability that no memory buffer will become saturated in the next

time period, and (2) the expected time until the saturation of a memory

buffer.

3Responsiveness has two components: (1) the timeliness of the information

in the data base, and (2) the speed with which information is processed.

The timeliness of the data base is not an issue addressed by the DDA.

Therefore, throughout the remainder of this discussion, responsiveness

shall refer to the speed with which information is processed.

4The components of congestion of the DCC include such factors as the loads

on the main-frame and front-end processors, and the disk access requirements. LNIN
2-8

rates. 1 This version of the DDA was programmed on a hand-held calculator.

Although this preliminary version demonstrated significant potential for

aiding in information management procedure development, a major shortcoming was felt to be inaccuracies in the representation of the DCC as

a consequence of the fixed values incorporated into the preliminary model. 2

This shortcoming has been eliminated. The DDA described in this paper is

a general model, and is almost entirely input-driven, i.e., the level of

detail and the DCC configuration are specified by the inputs. As more

definite information regarding the DCC operation becomes available, the

congestion-prone areas of the DCC can be identified, and an appropriate

level of detail for the DDA can be selected. The generality and complexity

of the DDA could then be greatly reduced. It is anticipated that the final

form of the DDA could be programmed on a hand-held calculator, implemented

via table-and-chart procedures, or even programmed directly into the TOS

system.

2.2.3 DESCRIPTION OF DDA MODEL

The DDA is a general mathematical model of the DCC. That the DDA is

a general model means that it can be adapted to reflect changes in the DCC

hardware or software without changing the DDA, merely by adjusting the

values of some of the input parameters. Therefore, it is likely the DDA

Documented in the working paper, A Design/Decision Aid for the Tactical

Operations System (TOS) Division Computing Center (DCC), 10 November 1978, DRAFT.

2At the time that the DDA was developed, software documentation for the

DCC was not available, and only the A-level specifications had been

released. Consequently, hard data describing the DCC could not be

obtained.

,I I 
3i" 2-9

will not have to be modified to any significant degree to reflect developments of the DCC. Furthermore, the same DDA can be used to model a

degraded DCC (e.g., with one malfunctioning disk unit) by adjusting the

input parameter values.

The DDA is an analytic model consisting of a set of mathematical

equations. The equations were obtained by representing the DCC computer

network as a queuing network and adapting standard queuing theory results

1 to this application. An analytic model, the DDA uses expected (average)

values; for example, average arrival rates.

Provided below is a discussion of: (1) the inputs to the DDA; (2)

the outputs available from the DDA; (3) the queuing network representation

of the DDA; and (4) the analyst's activities supporting the use of the DDA.

More detailed discussions are presented in subsequent chapters.

2.2.3.1 Inputs to DDA

The DDA requires three basic types of inputs: (1) configuration inputs;

(2) usage inputs; and (3) processing inputs. The configuration inputs

describe the basic structure of the DCC; e.g., the number of processors.

The usage inputs, e.g., the job arrival rates, describe the external

demands on the DCC. The processing inDuts describe the dynamics of DCC

operation, e.g., how jobs are routed among the processors.

1With an analytic model, a specific set of input values will always produce the same output values. The DAA differs in this way from a discrete

event ("Monte Carlo") simulation in which a particular set of inputs can

produce a different set of outputs on each run.

'h /!

L• , , , , 'n n I1 I I F I ...
2-10

2.2.3.2 Outputs from DDA

The DDA produces three types of outputs: (1) reliability outputs;

(2) responsiveness outputs; and (3) intermediate outputs. The reliability

outputs have two components: (1) the probability that a memory buffer will

become saturated within a given time interval; and (2) the expected time

until the saturation of a memory buffer. The responsiveness outputs have

one component for each type of job represented in the inputs: the mean

time elapsed between initiation and completion of DCC processing on each

type of job.

The intermediate outputs are computed during the process of computing

the reliability and responsiveness outputs. There are six intermediate

outputs produced by the DDA describing the internal status of the DCC,

e.g., the utilizationI of each of the processors.

Reliability and responsiveness are two of the three primary measures

of DCC performance (accessibility being the third) and will be used in

future phases of the project to evaluate candidate management procedures.

The intermediate outputs will be used to analyze the interactions of

various inputs and how changes in the inputs affect the outputs. The

intermediate outputs are, therefore, expected to be useful in guiding

the selection of candidate management procedures.

IThe utilization of a processor is the ratio of the arrival rate of

tasks to the service rate of the tasks. A utilization greater than one

means that tasks are arriving faster than they can be processed.

A
2-11

2.2.3,3 Queuing Network Representation of the DCC

The DDA is concerned with representing the flow and processing of

information in the DCC. The DDA does not represent and is not concerned

with the content of the information handled by the DCC. The DDA relates

the DCC processing capacity and the user demands on that capacity

(accessibility) to congestion in the DCC, and relates that congestion to

the performance measures defined as reliability and responsiveness.

A queuing network is a particular type of mathematical structure well

suited to representing congestion in computer networks such as the DCC.

The queuing network representation is based on a description of how the

system operates, and is concerned with such factors as how busy the processors are, how the processors are interconnected to form subsystems,

how the memory buffers are used by the subsystems, and how processing

is routed through the network.

2.2.4 APPLICATION ACTIVITIES

It is anticipated that three tasks will be performed in order to set

the stage for analysis of management procedures: (1) collection of input

data; (2) selection of candidate management procedures and estimating

their impacts on user demands for DCC accessibility; and (3) selecting

a set of scenarios describing potential TOS field environments and

See B. Beizer, Micro-Analysis of Computer System Performance, New York:

Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1978, and L. Kleinrock, Queuing Systems, Volume 2:

Computer Applications, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1976.

w . . . . . . . . . . .2 • - . . . . . . . . ... I . . .. . ... . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . - - . . . _ III IL II. • • :
'I oil

2-12

estimating the user demands for accessibility in these environments.

These activities will provide the background for the design and evaluation of information management procedures.

2.2.5 FUTURE DIRECTIONS

It is anticipated that future work on the DDA will occur in five

areas: (1) extensions to include the supporting communications net;

(2) implementation; (3) collection of input data; (4) experimentation;

and (5) validation. The near-term implementation effort is expected to

include developing a computer program to execute the DDA equations.

The collection of input data could include activities such as consulting with the software developers, analyzing the software documentation,

and extrapolating from the B-level specifications. These could result in

specifying a level of detail for the DDA and fixing values for some of the

inputs. These results could make possible simplifications of the computer

program implementation which could, therefore, reduce the computer

requirements.

Experimentation would involve the use of the DDA to estimate the impacts

on the DCC of various candidate management procedures under various field

situations. A by-product of this analysis would be an identification of

those areas of the OCC which contribute little to the overall congestion

effects. The representation of these aspects of the DCC might be eliminated from the DDA, resulting in further reductions in the computational

requirements.
i ii I

L_I II...

2-13

Validation refers to determining whether or not the DDA outputs

are similar to those that would have been obtained from experimentation with a working prototype DCC. Validation can be accomplished by

comparing the predictions of the DDA to the performance of a prototype

DCC, and then determining whether or not any disparities would have

made any difference in the design or selection of the management procedures. If no significant disparities are detected, the DDA can be

accepted as a valid model of the DCC, at least in prototype. In the

interim until a prototype DCC can be realized, the utility of the DDA

for investigating user requirements, design trade-offs, and operational

test designs should not be underestimated.

2.3 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION SUMMARIZATION IN A CORPS LEVEL SCENARIO

2.3.1 INTRODUCTION

Summarization involves the condensation or reorganization of information. Within the Army's Tactical Operations System (TOS), information

summarization can be expected to fulfill multiple purposes. For example,

summarization procedures can be employed to enhance the efficiency of

data utilization when the system is operating well, to prevent overloads

on the TOS hardware and software, and to provide hard copy backup

information if the computer-based system should go down. These kinds of

information reduction functions have a very simple rationale behind them;

namely, to reduce user cognitive load, to reduce system load, or both.

Whatever the motivation, however, alternative approaches to summarizing

information are possible and their potential effectiveness requires

thoughtful analysis.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _
2-14

Although the effects of information overload on decision performance

are not fully understood, there is a general concensus that if too much

information is presented, meaningful data interpretation and effective

decision making are retarded. The potential problem of information

overload is especially evident in TOS, where the technical capability

of the system will most likely increase the density of intelligence

information to the point where it will overwhelm the users. Therefore,

appropriate summarization procedures must be developed within the

framework of automated systems to condense and to organize the volume

of information into a form that can be used efficiently and effectively.

To obtain data to support the development of useful guidelines for

summarization of TOS message content, particularly tactical intelligence

data, an initial experimental investigation was designed and conducted.

The approach taken was "product-oriented" rather than "process-oriented."

That is, the focus of the study was not on how summaries of intelligence

data are generated; instead, an attempt was made to first identify "good"

summaries and then to analyze their properties and structural characteristics. In this manner, the essence of what makes an effective summary

could be used to suggest guidelines for summarizing one type of tactical

data.

A reasonable alternative to the present experiment would have been

to study field manuals, inspect current course outlines, and ask selected

"experts" for their opinion about what a "good" summary should contain.

However, such an approach only yields a definition of what should be.

Given the advantage of adequate time, we preferred to take a more basic

look at what is actually done by a selectad sample of officers. At worst,

we will verify the status quo; at best, we will uncover tendencies that

L. . . i•l I
2-15

.,,i

provide valuable clues for future research which will develop new

procedures to reconcile differences between doctrinal requirements and

observed performance.

2.3.2 METHOD

In brief, 19 staff officers were asked to read a description of a

defensive tactical scenario and examine 30 enemy situation data (ESD)

messages. The messages, presented in current TOS format, were selected

from the Corps TOS scenario and described the beginning of a border

crossing and attack in Germany by Warsaw Pact forces. The participants'

task was tn rate each message in terms of how essential it is to the

understanding of the situation at hand, and to summarize the tactical

information contained in the messages in preparation for a three minute

briefing of the G2. The summaries from three participants were eliminated

from the data set because it was strongly suspected that their performance

was based upon previous fariliarity with the scenario from which the

present materials were drawn, rather than upon the subset of materials

actually used (e.g., map coordinates and events were mentioned that did

not appear in the subset of information given to the participants). The

remaining 16 hand-written summaries were then typed and rated by five

experienced military officers with relevant exper 4 ence ("evali;ators")

in terms of content, accuracy, and organization. For each summary, an

overall numerical evaluation, as well as specific critical comments

concerning positive and negative qualities were also collected.

Following the work of Kintsch and van DiJk', it was assumed that

a summary is representative of the summarizer's basis for evaluation and

1W. Kintsch and T.A. van Dijk, "Comments on Sonaries of Stories,"

Languages, 1975, 40: 98-116.

~- ~ --- . --- -J-.

______ ______ _____
2-16

mental organization of the message content. This basis, which is an

organized knowledge structure, or schema, provides a mental outline for the

learner onto which the appropriate elements from the material to be learned

can be "attached." Consequently, a major analytical task toward the

development of guidelines for summarization was to extract the schema that

was applied successfully to the messages by the staff officers in generating

"good" summaries.

Operationally, a schema can be defined as a two-dimensional, or

hierarchical outline with the dimensions being subordination and sequential

order. Subordination has typically been determined using derivational

rules applied directly to the full text, but this procedure is timeconsuming and is often highly subjective. Fortunately, the subordination

of information based upon derivational rules has been found to be correlated

with 'the likelihood that a reader will include the information in a summary

of the full text (Thorndykel). Therefore, in the present experiment,

subordination could be determined for each message in terms of the

percentage of the staff officers that included some aspect of that

message in their summaries. A message with a higher inclusion percentage

was assigned a higher position in the structure.

Sequential order was assessed by deriving an output-position percentile for each message included in each staff officer's summary, which

allowed for the median output-position percentile for each message to

be computeO across summarizers. Following Bjork and Whitten 2 , the outputposition percentile [(sequential position of a message in a summary/total

P.W. Thorndyke, "Cognitive Structures in Comprehension and Mem~ory of

Narrative Discourse", Cognitive Psychology, 1977, 9: 77-110.

2R.A. Bjork and W.B. Whitten, "Recency-Sensitive Processes in Long-Term

Free Recall," Cognitive Psycholocy, 1974, 6: 173-189.
2-17

number of messages included in the summary) X lO0] is a measure of output

position where the derived value is standardized with respect to the

number of elements in the output. Once the two-dimensional underlying

structure was characterized in terms of the messages, the discriminable

components of the structure (message clusters) were labeled, in terms

of their general content, as nodes in the schema.

Since a major portion of some summaries could be based upon

inferences drawn from the messages (Thorndyke), or upon different

aspects of the same messages, the analysis based upon direct references

to the 30 messages was seen as informative, but not sufficient for the

development of guidelines for summarization. To allow for the inclusion

of an interpretation of the intelligence information in the schema, a

separate analysis was conducted based upon the content of the summaries

irrespective of the content of the messages. First, a list of general

topics included in the "good" summaries, as defined by the evaluatols'

overall evaluations, was generated. These topics were systematically

extracted from the summaries themselves, and therefore they were not

necessarily mutually exclusive. However, they were exhaustive with

respect to the content of the summaries sampled. Then, a median outputposition percentile was computed for each topic that was included in the

"good" summaries. The subordination dimension was scaled as before in

terms of the percentage of staff officers including a given topic in

their summaries. Thus, the derived schema was again allowed to be I

hierarchical in form.

P.14. Thorndyke, "The Role of Inferences in Discourse Comprehension",

Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior, 1976, 15: 437-446.
2-18

In addition to these two procedures designed to extract an underlying

schema from the "good" summaries, several other analyses of the data were

conducted to facilitate the development of summarization guidelines.

Specifically, these analyses addressed the question to what attributes

discriminate "good" summaries from "poor" summaries.

2.3.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Considerable disagreement was observed among the evaluators with

respect to which summaries were judged better than others, either in

terms of the overall evaluations or in terms of the decomposed ratings

of content, accuracy, or organization. Nevertheless, six summaries

receiving the highest average overall evaluations (i.e., the "good"

summaries) could be isolated for the derivation of a schema that would

be useful for portraying the type of intelligence information examined

here. For contrast, the six summaries receiving the lowest average overall

evaluations (i.e., the "poor" summaries) were also identified. The "good"

summaries could be differentiated from the "poor" summaries in terms of

content; in general, the former included more information about unit

movement, and less information about the composition of second echelon

forces.

In terms of a sequential outline for summarization (i.e., the schema),

the authors of the "good" summaries tended to first describe the engagement of enemy forces along the border, and then described unit movement

both near and behind the border. Following this summary of the dynamic

aspects of the enemy situation, the locations of key support units were

noted, often in conjunction with a statement regarding the location of
2-19

the second echelon. Finally, soon after the inference was made regarding

W" the location of che second echelon, another inference was made regarding

the probable point of main thrust by the enemy. Three levels of detail

(subordination) could be clearly discriminated from the schema, and these

three levels could provide a basis for specific guidelines regarding

content and order of presentation for general and more detailed summaries.

COllectively, the evaluators felt that a "good" summary of intelligence

information should include hard facts plus an interpretation of what the

intelligence information implies, for example, the reporting of enemy

unit movement behind the border as possible reinforcements for units

already engaged. If a summary contained only a list of facts, categorized

or uncategorized, the evaluators made statements like "the summary recipient

could have just flipped through the messages himself," or "...too many

numbers--not really a summary." Thus, the restatement of intelligence

D data as indicators of significant features of the enemy situation, such

as the point of main thrust or the location of the second echelon, was

valued. However, they insisted that the interpretation be wellfounded

in the available data as some summaries were rated "poor" because

of "illogical" or "unwarranted" interpretation of the data. Also,

according to the evaluators, "interpretation should be clearly identified

from fact."

With respect to other attributes of the summaries, the majority of

the evaluators commented that they preferred summaries that: (1) were

"conversational" in style, (2) were organized by zone, sector of the

Corps, or area of enemy concentration, (3) included dynamic aspects of

• m b- • '-I • ;- -
2-20

'the tactical situation, such as information regarding speed and direction

of enemy movement, (4) stated what key information that is not known

(i.e., the summary did not leave gaps in the schema because of missing

Sinformation 1 , and (5) provided estimates of confirmation (reliability)

of the intelligence information where appropriate. In general, the

"better" summaries were seen as more straightforward, systematic,

accurate and informative than the "poorer" summaries.

2.3.4 CONCLUSION

A methodological technique developed within the domain of cognitive

psychology was successfully applied to the analysis of written summaries

of formatted tactical intelligence messages. Although only 16 staff

officers generated the summaries and five experienced military personnel

evaluated them, the results provide valuable insight concerning the

content and structure of those suninarles which are likely to be judged

most effective in the communication of information contained in an ESD

message file. Such prescriptive norms for "good" sumnaries can be

translated into guidelines, and possibly formats and field procedures,

for staff officers to enable them to produce more useful and effective

intelligence-message summaries. However, before these suinmarization

guidelines can be implemented in the field, further empirical research

is required to assess and validate their effects upon summarization

performance, ard to evaluate their impact upon tactical decision-making

performance. Additional research is also called for to investigate the

degree to which these guidelines can be generalized to the summarization

of other forms of military inessages (e.g., friendly situation data).

I L ... , m I" I .. 1 I.
3-1

DISTRIBUTION

ARI Distribution List

4 OASD IM&RA) 2 HOUSACDEC, Ft Ord, ATTN: Library

2 HODA (DAMl.CSZ) 1 HOUSACOEC, Ft Ord, ATTN: ATEC- EX -E Hum Factors

1 HODA (DAPF PORI 2 USAEEC, Ft Benjamin Harrison, ATTN: Lilvaty

IHODA IOAMA-AR) 1 USAPACDC, Ft Benjamins Harrison, ATTN: ATCP --HR

1 HODA (0APE-HRE-PO) 1 USA Comm-Elect Soft, Ft Monmouth, ATTN: ATSN -EA

I HODA (SGRD-ID) I USAEC, Ft Monmouth, ATTN: AMSEL -CT HOP

1 HODA (DAMI-DOT-C) 1 USAEC, Ft Monmouth, ATTN: AMSEL -PA P

1 HODA (DAPC.PMZ-A) 1 USAEC, Ft Monmouth, ATTN: AMSEL-*Sl-CS

I HODA (DACH.PPZ.AI 1 USAEC, Ft Monmouth, ATTN: C, Fact Dew Or

I HODA (DAPE*HRF) I USA Materials Sys Anal Agley, Aberdeen. ATTN: AMXSY --P

1 HQDA (DAPE-MPO-CI 1 Edgewood Arsenal, Aberdeen, ATTN: SAREA. BL- H

1 HODA IDAPE-DWI 1 USA Ord Ctr &i Sch, Aberdeen, ATTN: ATSL-TEM--C

1 HODA (DAPE-HRL) 2 USA Hum Engr Lab. Aberdeen, ATTN: Library/Dir

1 HODA (DAPE.CPS) 1 USA Combat Arms Ting Sd, Ft Banning, ATTN: Ad Supervisor

1 HODA (DAFD-MFAI 1 USA Infantry Hum Fisch Unit, Ft Beanning, ATTN: Chief

1 HODA (DARO-ARS-PI 1 USA Infantry 9d, Ft Benning, ATTN: STEBC-TE-*T

1 HCIDA (DAPC-PAS-AI 1 USASMA, Ft Bliss, ATTN: ATSS--LRC

1 HODA (DUSA-OlRl 1 USA Air Def Sch. Ft Bliss, ATTN: ATSA CTD ME

1 HODA (OAMO-ROR) 1 USA Air Oaf Sch, Ft Bliss, ATTN: Tech Lit)

I110IDA (DASG) 1 USA Air Del Bd. Ft Bliss, ATTN: FILES

1 HODA IDAIO-PI) I USA Air Oaf Sd, Ft Bliss, ATTN: STEBO-PO

I Chtief, Consult Div (DA-OTSGI. Adeiphi, MD 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College. Ft Leavenworth, ATTN; Lilt)

1 Mil Asst. Hum Res, ODDARiE, OAD (E&iLS) 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College.i Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: ATSW-SE- L

1 110 USARAL. APO Seattler. ATTN: ARAGP-R I USA Crnd & Genaral SOt College. Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: Ed Advisor

I HO First Army, ATTN: AFKA-01 TI 1 UISA Combined Aimns Cmbt Dev Act, Ft Leaveittaortli. ATTN: OepCdr

2 HO Fifth Army. Ft Sam Houston 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt 0ev Act. Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: CCS

I Dir. Army Sit Studies (Ifc. ATTN: OAVCSA IOSPI I USA Combined Armas Cmbt Dev Act. Ft Leavesnworth, ATTN: ATCASA

1 Oft! Chiefta Sitt , Studies Ofe I USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dev Act. Ft Leavenworth. ATTN: ATCACO-E

1 I)CSI'ER, ATTN: CPS/OCP 1 USA Corrltined Arms% Cmbt 0ew Act. I't Leaventworth, ATTN: ATCACC.-4.1

1 rhea Army Lilt, Pentuagoit, ATTN: RSB Chief 1 USAFCOM. Night Vision Lab, Ft Belvoir. ATTN: AMSEL-NV--SO

1 The Army Lit). Pentagon, ATTN: ANRAL 3 USA Computer Sys Cmd, Ft Belvoir, ATTN: Tacht Library

1 Otc, Asst Sact of the Army PIR&Dl 1 USAMERDC. Ft Belvoir, ATTN: STSFB--OO

I Tech Support Ole, OJCS 1 USA Eig Sch, Ft Belvoir, ATTN: Library

I USASA, Arlington, ATTN: IARO-T I USA Topographic Lab, Ft Balvoir, ATTN: ETIL TO-S

1 USA Fisch Of c, Durham, ATTN: Life Scitnces Dir 1 USA Topographic Lab. Ft Balvoir, ATTN: STINFO Center

2 LISARIEM, Natick, ATTN: SGRD-UE CA 1 USA Toapographic Lab, Ft Belvoir, ATTN: ETIL GSL

I LISA r rc, It, CIhtyioii, A IrIN: !, lItII: MO A I IsqA It rhi~llqnre C tr SII Sft. FtI Huti:hicla,, A fTN: CTO MS

I USAIMA, ft ralpl, AtrN~a: AlSU-CTD-OM 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: ATS-CTD-MS

I, USAIMA, Ft Bragg. ATTN: Marquat Lib 1 USA Intelligence Ctr &i Soft, Ft Huacituca, ATTN: ATSI-TE

1 US WAC Ctr &i Sch, Ft McClellan. ATTN: Lit) 1 USA I ntelligence Ctr &i Soft, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: ATSI -TE X -GS

I US WAC Ctr &i Sch, Ft McClellan, ATTN: Traq Dir 1 USA Intelligence Ctr &i Soft, Ft Huashuca, ATTN: ATSI-CTS--OR

1 USA Oluartermaster Sch, FtI Lee, ATTN: ATSM-TE 1 USA Intelligence Ctr &i Soft, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: ATSI-CTD- OT

I Interlligence Material Dew Ofc, EWL, Ft Holabird 1 USA Intelligence Ctr &i Sof, Ft Huachuca. ATTN: ATSI-CTID-CS

1 USA SE Signal Soft, Ft Gordon. ATTN: ATSO-EA 1 USA Intelligence Chr &i Soft. Ft Huachuca. ATTN: DAS/SRD

I USA Chaplait Ctr &i Schs, Fti Hamilton. ATTN: ATSC-TF-RD 1 USA Intelligence Ctir & Soft, Ft Huactiuca. ATTN! ATSI-TEM

1 USATSCH, F t Eustis, ATTN: Educ Advisor I USA intelligence Ctr &i Soft, Ft Ifuachuca ATTN: Library

1 USA War Colletqe, Carlisle Barracks. ATTN: Lib I COR, HO Ft Huachuca, ATTN: Tech Ref Div

7 WRAI R, Nniropsyrthiaitt Div 2 CODR. USA Electronic Prvq Grd, ATTN: STEEP MT-S

1 DLI. SDA, Moriteray 1 H42, TCATA. ATTN: Tech Library

I USA Concept Anal Agocy, Bethesda. ATTN: MOCA-M R I HO, TCATA. ATTN, AT CAT-OP-O, Ft Hood

1 t ISA Concept Anal Agcy, Bethesda, ATTN: MOCA-Jr I USA Recruiting Camd. Ft herlden. ATTN: USARCPMI-P

1USA Arctic Test Ctr. APO Seattle, ATTN: STEAC-PL-MI 1 Senior Army Atti., USAFAGOD,'TAC, Elgin AF Aux Fld No. 9

11 USA Arctic Test Ctr, APO Seattle, ATTN: AMSTE-PL-TS 1 HO, USARPAC. DCSPER, APO SF 901166, ATTN: GPPE -SE

1 USA Armament Cmdl, Redstone Arsenal, ATTN: ATSK-TEM 1 Stlmsort Lib, Academy of Health Sciences, Ft Sam Houston

1 USA Armament Cmd, Rock Island, AT1'N: AMSAR-TDC 1 Marine Corps Inst., ATTN: Dean-MCI

I FAA-NAFEC. Atlantic City, ATTN: Library I HO, USMC, Commandant. ATTN: Code MTMT

1 FAA-NAF EC, Atlantic City, ATTN: Human Engr Or 1 HO, USMC, Cammandeft. ATTN: Code MPI-20-28

I FAA Aeronautical Ctr, Oklahoma City, ATTN: AAC-44D 2 USCG Academy, New London, ATTN: Admission

2 USA Fid Arty Sdh, Ft Sill. ATTN: Library 2 USCG Academy, New London, ATTN: Library

1 USA Armor Sch. Ft Knox, ATTN: Library 1 USCG Training Ctr, NY, ATTN: CO

1 UISA Armor Soft, Ft Knox, ATTN: ATSB-DI.E 1 USCG Training Ctr. NY, ATTN: Educ Svc Ole

3I USA Armor Sch, Ft Knoxa, ATTN: ATSSDOT TP 1 USCG, Ptiycholl Res Or. DC, ATTN: OP 1/62

1 USA Armor Soft, Ft Kntox. ATTN -ATSS.CD-AD I HO Mid-Range Br, MC Ott, Outintlcao. ATTN: P&iS Divj
3-2

1 US Marine Corps Liaison Of C, AMC, Alexandria, ATTN, AMCGS-r 1 DOtf Civil hust of Envlro Medicine, Canada

1 USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, ATTN: Al RD-ED 1 AIR CRESS, Kensington, AT'TN: Info Sy's Or

6 USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, ATTN: ATPR AD I Militaaerpevitologisk Tionesta. Copenhagen

I USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, ATTN: ATTS--EA 1 Military Attache, French Embassy, ATTN: Doe Sec

I USA Forces Cmd, Ft McPherson, ATTN: Library 1 Medecin Chef, C.E, R.P. A. -Arsenal, Toulon/Naval Franew

2 USA Aviation Test Sd, Ft Rucker, ATTN: STEBO-PO 1 Prin Scientific O0f. Appi Hum Eingi BAch Div, Ministry

1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety. Ft Rtucker, ATTN: Library of Defense, Now Delhi

1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety, Ft Rucker, ATTN: Educ Advisor 1 PorsFisch Oft Library, AKA, Israel Defente Forces

1 USA Aviation Sch, Ft Rucker, ATTN: PO Drawer 0 1 Ministeris van Defenele, DOOP/KL Aid Sociasl

1 HOUSA Aviation Sy's Cmd. St Louis, ATTN: AMSAV-ZDR Psychologische Zaken, The Hage", Netherlands

2 USA Aviation Sys TLst Act,, Edwaids AFB, ATTN: SAVTE-T

1 USA Air Del Sech, Fi Hflis%. ATTN: ATSA TFM

I USA Air Mtiilliiy R%cli & Doty Lai), Moffett Fid. ATTN: SAVDL AS

1 USA Aviation Sch, Res Tog Mgt. Ft Rucker, ATTN: ATST-T-BTM

1 USA Aviation Sch, CO, Ft Rucker, ATTN: ATST-D--A

I HiO. DARCOM. Alexandria, ATTN: AMXCD-TL

I HO, DARCOM, Alexandria, ATTN: CDR

1 US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Serials Unit

I US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN! Ofc of Milt Ldrshp

1 US Militaiy Academy. West Point, ATTN: MAOA

I USA Stendaidiuaiion Gp, UK. FPO NY, ATTN: MASS -GC

1 Ofc of Naval Fisch, Arlington, ATTN: Code 452

3 01c of Navel Rich, Arlington, ATTN: Coda 458

1 Ofc: of Naval Rich, Arlington, ATTN: Code 450

1 Ofc of Naval Asch, Arlington, ATTN : Code, 441

1 Naval Aerospic Mod Res Lah, Pensacola, ATTN: Acous Sch Div

I Naval Aeroslir. Med Res Lab, Pensacola, ATTN: Code L51

I Naval Aarospc Med Res Lab, Pensacola, ATTN: Code L5

1 Chief of NayPfen, ATTN: Per%-OR

1 NAVAIISSTA, Norfolk, ATTN: Safety Ctr

I Nay Oceanograp~hic. DC, ATTN: Coda 6251, Chaorts & Tech

1 Center of Naval Anal. ATTN: Doc Ctr

I NavAirSysCom, ATTN: AIW-.5313C

1 Nay BuMed, ATTNt 7 13

1 Natio~elicopterSuboSquit 2. FPO SF 9WI0

1 AFHRL (FT) Williams AFO

1 AFHRL ITT) Lowry AFB

1 AFHRL (AS) WPAFB. OH

2 AFHRL (DOJZ) Brooks AFB

1 AFHRL (DOJN) Lackland AFS

1 HOUSAF (INYBD)

I NOUSAF IDPXXA)

1 AFVTG (RD) Randolph AFO

3 AMRL (HE) WPAFB, OH

2 AF Inst of Tech, WPAFB, OH, ATTN: ENE/SL

I ATC iXPTDI Randolph AFB

1 USAF AeriMed Lih, Brooks AFO fSUL- 4), ATTN: DOC SEC

1 AFOSR (NLI. Arlington

1 AF Log Cmd, McClellain AFB. ATTN: ALC/DPCRB

1 Air Force Academy, CO. ATTN: Dept of Bel Scn

5 NecPers &i Des Ctr, San Dieow

2 Navy Med Neuropsychiatric Risch Unit. San Diego

1 Nay Electronic Lab, San Diego, ATTN: Res Lab

1 Nay TrisgCen, San Dleorjo. ATTN: Code 9000-Lib

1 NavPostGraSch. Montesey, ATTN: Code 56Aa

I NavPiistGraSch, Monterey, ATTN: Code 2124

1 NavTrngEquipCtr, Orlando,. ATTN: Tech Litt

1 US Dept of Labor, DC, ATTN: Manpowe Admin

1 US Dept of Justice. DC, ATTN: Drug Enforce Admln

1 Nat Sur of Standards, DC, ATTN: Computer Info Section

1 Nat Clearing House for MN- Info, Rockville

1 Denver Federal Ctr, Lakewood, ATTN: BLM

12 Defense Documentation Center

4 Dir Psych, Army Hq, Russell Ofes, Canberra

1 Scientiftic Advisr, Mil Od, Army H4q, Russell Dics, Canberra

1 Mil and Air Attache, Austrian Embassy

1 Conti do Recherche Des Factasins, Humasine do Ia Defense

Nationale, Brussels

2 Canadian Joint Staff Washington

1 C/Air Staff. Royal Canadian AF, ATTN: Pars Sid Anal Or

3 Chief, Canadian Daf Fisch Staff, ATTN: C/CRDS(W)

4 81itfih Def Staff. British Embassy, Washington