Strategy for an Army Center for Network Science, Technology, and Experimentation

99 Pages·2007·3.2 MB·English

by  Technology

Committee on Strategies for
Network Science, Technology, and Experimentation
Board on Army Science and Technology
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing
Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute
of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for
their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract No. W911NF-06-C0066 between the National
Academy of Sciences and the Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclu-
sions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support
for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-10696-2
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-10696-6
Limited copies of this report are available from the Board on Army Science and Tech-
nology, National Research Council, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Room 940, Washington, DC
20001, [phone].
Additional copies are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street,
N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055, [phone] or [phone] (in the
Washington metropolitan area), Internet, http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2007 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of
distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the
furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the
authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate
that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters.
Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of
the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers.
It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with
the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government.
The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at
meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior
achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of
Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences
to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examina-
tion of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the
responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to
be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of
medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute
of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916
to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of
furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with
general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering
in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering com-
munities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine.
Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the
National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org

COMMITTEE ON STRATEgIES FOR NETWORk SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOgy, AND ExPERIMENTATION
VERNE L. (LARRY) LYNN, Chair, Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (retired)
RAJ K. AGGARWAL, Rockwell Collins Corporation
A. MICHAEL ANDREWS II, L-3 Communications
RICHARD L. DUNN, Consultant, Edgewater, Maryland
GERALD HARRIS, Global Business Network
JASON F. PROVIDAKES, MITRE Corporation
ZITA M. SIMUTIS, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and
Social Sciences (retired)
W. DAVID SINCOSKIE, Telcordia Technologies, Inc.
RONALD L. SMITH, University of Nevada School of Medicine
Staff
ROBERT J. LOVE, Study Director
HARRISON T. PANNELLA, Senior Program Officer
NIA D. JOHNSON, Senior Program Associate
ALExANDER R. REPACE, Senior Program Assistant
SARAH E. PELLEGRIN, Senior Program Assistant

BOARD ON ARMy SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOgy
MALCOLM R. O’NEILL, Chair, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired),
Vienna, Virginia
ALAN H. EPSTEIN, Vice Chair, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge
RAJ K. AGGARWAL, Rockwell Collins, Cedar Rapids, Iowa
SETH BONDER, The Bonder Group, Ann Arbor, Michigan
JAMES CARAFANO, The Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C.
ROBERT L. CATTOI, Rockwell International Corporation (retired), Dallas,
Texas
DARRELL W. COLLIER, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command
(retired), Leander, Texas
ROBERT R. EVERETT, MITRE Corporation (retired), New Seabury,
Massachusetts
PATRICIA K. FALCONE, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California
WILLIAM R. GRAHAM, National Security Research, Inc. (retired), Arlington,
Virginia
PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
CARL GUERRERI, Electronic Warfare Associates, Inc., Herndon, Virginia
M. FREDERICK HAWTHORNE, University of Missouri, Columbia
MARY JANE IRWIN, Pennsylvania State University, University Park
CLARENCE W. KITCHENS, Science Applications International Corporation,
Vienna, Virginia
LARRY LEHOWICZ, Quantum Research International, Arlington, Virginia
JOHN W. LYONS, U.S. Army Research Laboratory (retired), Ellicott City,
Maryland
EDWARD K. REEDY, Georgia Tech Research Institute (retired), Atlanta
DENNIS J. REIMER, DFI International, Washington, D.C.
W. DAVID SINCOSKIE, Telcordia Technologies, Inc., Morristown, New Jersey
JUDITH L. SWAIN, University of California, San Diego
WILLIAM R. SWARTOUT, Institute for Creative Technologies, Marina del Rey,
California
EDWIN L. THOMAS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
ELLEN D. WILLIAMS, University of Maryland, College Park
Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director
CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate
DONNA L. RANDALL, Administrative Coordinator
DEANNA P. SPARGER, Program Administrative Coordinator
i
Preface
The 2005 NRC report Network Science developed a working definition for
network science as “the study of network representations of physical, biological,
and social phenomena leading to predictive models of these phenomena” (NRC,
2005, p. 2). In this light, network science can be seen as a cornerstone for future
military operations and the conduct of network-centric warfare.
The present report, Strategy for an Army Center for Network Science, Tech-
nology, and Experimentation, builds on the Network Science report by evaluating
a possible framework for the Army to conduct research, development, test, and
evaluation (RDTE) in areas of network science important to the future. The study
was conducted in an environment in which changes were well underway to relo-
cate and alter significantly the network science, technology, and experimentation
(NSTE) resources of the Army and in which there exist diverse views on effective
ways to organize and conduct science and technology (S&T) within a military
construct. The overall challenge for the Army is to organize its S&T resources so
as to advance NSTE on a broad front while maintaining those relationships and
activities that have proven productive.
The statement of task for the study was as follows:
The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology)
(ASAALT) has requested the NRC BAST to conduct a study to define advanced
operating models and architectures for future Army laboratories and centers.
The NRC will examine several representative centers, and address the follow-
ing issues:
1. Consult with the ASAALT Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Technical
Assessment Board to obtain data on organizational goals, functions that support
ii
iii prEfACE
the goals, activities that support the functions, and the disciplines required to
support the activities and the critical mass required for each discipline for the
network science, technologies, and experimentation center (NSTEC).
2. Examine the various business models, managerial architectures and man-
power needs both current and future for NSTEC, to include the assessment
and potential utility of best practices in successful multi-disciplinary research
consortiums.
3. Identify deficiencies in the Army infrastructure for conducting state-of-the-art
S&T for network-centric warfare (NCW), and recommend how these should be
improved.
4. Consider the establishment of a world-class user facility with state-of-the-art
equipment within the NSTEC to engage the broad community (both civilian
and military) doing R&D in networks, both human-engineered and biologi-
cally evolved, and situational awareness technologies and systems to further the
Transformational goals of NCW. Include the delineation of the core competen-
cies and a detailed manpower analysis (relevant disciplines, critical mass in each
area, etc.) for such an organization.
5. Recommend relocations within existing legal authority to better manage the
various assets and resources and to create an improved synergy among them to
achieve the goals of NCW.
6. Explore existing legal authorities, which will enable the Army to best exploit
partnerships, alternative funding and sharing of resources with industry through
various relationships.

I would like to thank the committee for its hard work in interviewing numer-
ous experts, assessing the pertinent issues, and developing recommendations
to address these concerns. The committee in turn is grateful to the many Army
personnel engaged in NSTE for the useful information they provided. We also
greatly appreciate the support and assistance of the National Research Council
staff, which ably assisted the committee in its fact-finding activities and in the
production of this report.
Lastly, this study was conducted under the auspices of the NRC Board on
Army Science and Technology (BAST). The BAST was established in 1982 as a
unit of the National Research Council at the request of the United States Army
and brings broad military, industrial, and academic scientific, engineering, and
management expertise to bear on technical challenges of importance to senior
Army leaders. The Board is not a study committee; rather, it discusses potential
study topics, develops and frames study tasks, ensures project planning, suggests
potential experts to serve as committee members or reviewers, and convenes
meetings to examine strategic issues for the sponsor, the Assistant Secretary of
the Army (Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology).
Although the Board members are listed on page vi of this report, they were
not, with the exception of any Board members nominated and appointed to serve
prEfACE ix
as formal members of the study committee, asked to endorse the committee’s
conclusions or recommendations, nor did they review final drafts of the report
before its release.
Larry Lynn, Chair
Committee on Strategies for Network Science,
Technology, and Experimentation