Decision support tools for the operational planning process Topic(s): Collaborative Technologies for Network-Centric Operations Author(s):
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
approach to develop plans and orders for Canadian Forces operations. The CFOPP includes but is not limited to analysing the situation, identifying relevant factors, sketching courses of action, developing the commander’s guidance and decision, and producing detailed annexes necessary for orders and tasking of CF units. It is based on an Estimate Process. Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) is investigating computer-based decision support to improving the decision cycle and timeliness of orders and tasking. In this paper, we focus on key components of the CFOPP. In particular, this paper describes computer-based tools to support center of gravity analysis, decisive point analysis, risk management, criteria management, dynamic link management and decisionmatrix management. These tools have been embedded into DRDC Collaborative Operations Planning System (COPlanS), an integrated flexible suite of planning, decision
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it