评估海军任务组的高级方法

IF 0.2 4区 工程技术 Q4 ENGINEERING, CIVIL Naval Engineers Journal Pub Date : 2012-03-16 DOI:10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x
RANDY MARTENS, MARK REMPEL
{"title":"评估海军任务组的高级方法","authors":"RANDY MARTENS,&nbsp;MARK REMPEL","doi":"10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Defense organizations within many nations (e.g., United States and Canada), use capability-based planning (CBP) to guide their force development processes. A key element of the CBP process is testing current and proposed capabilities against force planning scenarios, particularly for asset evaluation. This analysis involves a wide range of capabilities, and thus is a multicriteria problem. Comparison of alternatives using multiple criteria is challenging, and often is assisted by aggregation techniques. Set in a naval context, this paper presents three high-level capability aggregation techniques: the vector method, star plot method, and wedge method. Each method aggregates naval task group capabilities, with respect to a scenario, into three quantifiable measures: effectiveness, unmatched, and unused. As with numerous techniques, the effectiveness gauges the ability of a task group to meet a set of scenario requirements. The unmatched and unused measures yield insight into capability gaps, which is an important aspect of CBP. The unmatched metric measures scenario requirements that are not provided by a task group and the unused metric measures task group capabilities that are not required by a scenario. An application of the methods is presented, including a discussion of their strengths and weaknesses. Based on this work, it is concluded that the vector method is the best of the three presented.</p>","PeriodicalId":49775,"journal":{"name":"Naval Engineers Journal","volume":"123 4","pages":"67-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"High-Level Methodologies to Evaluate Naval Task Groups\",\"authors\":\"RANDY MARTENS,&nbsp;MARK REMPEL\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Defense organizations within many nations (e.g., United States and Canada), use capability-based planning (CBP) to guide their force development processes. A key element of the CBP process is testing current and proposed capabilities against force planning scenarios, particularly for asset evaluation. This analysis involves a wide range of capabilities, and thus is a multicriteria problem. Comparison of alternatives using multiple criteria is challenging, and often is assisted by aggregation techniques. Set in a naval context, this paper presents three high-level capability aggregation techniques: the vector method, star plot method, and wedge method. Each method aggregates naval task group capabilities, with respect to a scenario, into three quantifiable measures: effectiveness, unmatched, and unused. As with numerous techniques, the effectiveness gauges the ability of a task group to meet a set of scenario requirements. The unmatched and unused measures yield insight into capability gaps, which is an important aspect of CBP. The unmatched metric measures scenario requirements that are not provided by a task group and the unused metric measures task group capabilities that are not required by a scenario. An application of the methods is presented, including a discussion of their strengths and weaknesses. Based on this work, it is concluded that the vector method is the best of the three presented.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49775,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Naval Engineers Journal\",\"volume\":\"123 4\",\"pages\":\"67-80\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Naval Engineers Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Naval Engineers Journal","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-3584.2010.00264.x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多国家(如美国和加拿大)的国防组织使用基于能力的规划(CBP)来指导其部队发展过程。CBP过程的一个关键要素是针对部队规划场景测试当前和拟议的能力,特别是针对资产评估。这种分析涉及广泛的能力,因此是一个多准则问题。使用多个标准对备选方案进行比较是一项挑战,而且通常有聚合技术的帮助。本文以海军为背景,提出了三种高级能力聚合技术:矢量法、星图法和楔形法。每种方法都将海军任务组针对一种场景的能力聚合为三种可量化的衡量标准:有效性、不匹配性和未使用性。与许多技术一样,有效性衡量任务组满足一组场景需求的能力。不匹配和未使用的措施可以洞察能力差距,这是CBP的一个重要方面。不匹配的度量衡量任务组未提供的场景需求,未使用的度量衡量场景不需要的任务组功能。介绍了这些方法的应用,包括对其优点和缺点的讨论。基于这项工作,得出结论,矢量方法是三种方法中最好的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
High-Level Methodologies to Evaluate Naval Task Groups

Defense organizations within many nations (e.g., United States and Canada), use capability-based planning (CBP) to guide their force development processes. A key element of the CBP process is testing current and proposed capabilities against force planning scenarios, particularly for asset evaluation. This analysis involves a wide range of capabilities, and thus is a multicriteria problem. Comparison of alternatives using multiple criteria is challenging, and often is assisted by aggregation techniques. Set in a naval context, this paper presents three high-level capability aggregation techniques: the vector method, star plot method, and wedge method. Each method aggregates naval task group capabilities, with respect to a scenario, into three quantifiable measures: effectiveness, unmatched, and unused. As with numerous techniques, the effectiveness gauges the ability of a task group to meet a set of scenario requirements. The unmatched and unused measures yield insight into capability gaps, which is an important aspect of CBP. The unmatched metric measures scenario requirements that are not provided by a task group and the unused metric measures task group capabilities that are not required by a scenario. An application of the methods is presented, including a discussion of their strengths and weaknesses. Based on this work, it is concluded that the vector method is the best of the three presented.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Naval Engineers Journal
Naval Engineers Journal 工程技术-工程:海洋
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Author's Response Author's Response Author's Response PRESIDENT'S PAGE THE FRANK G. LAW AWARD
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1