Bradley J. Best and Christian Lebiere in .NET Build Code 128 in .NET Bradley J. Best and Christian Lebiere

How to generate, print barcode using .NET, Java sdk library control with example project source code free download:
Bradley J. Best and Christian Lebiere using .net tocompose code 128c in web,windows application Code 3/9 the mout domain: requirem code128b for .NET ents for intelligent agents in military operations on urban terrain (mout) and close quarter battle (cqb) domains. MOUT environments are dis tinguished from the terrain of rural battle elds by the dominant features of densely packed manmade structures and multiple avenues of approach. MOUT tactics have been developed through the analysis of historical urban con ict and extrapolation to the capabilities of modern soldiers. These tactics prescribe methods for clearing blocks of buildings, individual buildings, oors in buildings, and individual rooms and hallways.

Important aspects of terrain in MOUT environments include elds of view, the closely related elds of re (which depend on the available weapons and the eld of view), available cover and concealment, obstacles to navigation, available lighting, and avenues of approach and escape. Close-quarter ghting in and around buildings makes command and control extremely dif cult. The main approach to this problem is to systematically clear zones in the battle eld, sector by sector, with certain units assigned to particular zones, and the use of clear and explicit procedures implemented by small teams.

The work described here involves the implementation of collaborative doctrinal tactics at the level of the individual infantry soldier by intelligent agents. Doctrinal MOUT tactics are extremely well-de ned. Movement techniques taught in MOUT training specify how to move while reducing the exposure to enemy re.

Open areas between buildings are crossed along the shortest possible path. Movement inside building hallways is done along the walls instead of down the center of the hallway with supporting personnel leapfrogging each other, alternating covering and moving. Clearing techniques specify which teammates will direct re where, and how to arrange units prior to room entry.

As an example of the speci city involved in this training, in a doctrinal room entrance, a pair of soldiers assumes a stacked position along the wall outside the doorway. The lead soldier directs his weapon towards the far corner whereas the second soldier steps around and behind them and tosses a grenade into the room. The use of a grenade is signaled to other assault team members nonverbally if possible, but otherwise verbally.

After grenade detonation, the rst shooter steps through the doorway (one step away from the wall, two steps in) and clears their immediate area using weapon re if necessary. The second shooter (who was stacked behind) steps through the doorway, buttonhooks, and clears their section of the room. Both shooters start from the outside corners and rotate towards the center wall, eventually converging after supressing any threats.

A second two-person team provides covering re and security in the hallway behind the rst team. The clearing team and covering team also communicate with a series of doctrinal statements, such as Clear, Coming out, etc..

Cognitive Agents Interacting in Real and Virtual Worlds Though there are many var iations, it is worth noting the explicit nature of the teamwork involved. Clearing hallways is similarly well speci ed. To clear an L-shaped hallway, a team of two soldiers will each take one wall of the initial portion of the hall.

The soldier on the far wall will advance to just before the intersection whereas the soldier on the near wall parallels this movement. The soldiers then, on a signal, move together into the hallway, one crouching and the other standing, clearing all targets. Modeling the continuum of behavior from structured doctrinal behavior to unstructured reactive behavior allows testing a range of opposing force behaviors against the expected doctrinal strategy.

Unlike friendly force behaviors, opposing force behavior is not well speci ed and ranges from coordinated, planned attacks by well-trained forces who carefully aim their weapons to disorganized sporadic attacks from enemies using the pray and spray weapon discharge technique. Thus, opposing forces should be capable of using doctrinal techniques, but also should be free to diverge substantially from them. 5.

1 Doctrinal Approaches to Building Clearing Case Study: Clearing an L-Shaped Hallway The vignette described here involves a pair of soldiers starting at the end of an L-shaped hallway whose mission is to clear the oor of opposing forces. The friendly forces employ doctrinal tactics and rst clear the hallway itself using the covering movements described earlier. The cleared hallway presents the soldiers with several doorways.

The soldiers then stack themselves at the doorways, enter the room (also described earlier), and clear any inner rooms discovered. Opposing forces return re if they are cornered or run and escape if they can (while ring some poorly aimed shots). These forces are very reactive compared to the friendly forces.

Their planning is limited to the hiding spots and defensive positions they initially assumed their goal is to defend the building they are in. As they spot the entering soldiers, they hastily re a shot or two while falling back. When cornered, they dig in and ght (one of many possible scenarios).

5.2 Sample ACT-R Models An overall ACT-R model for building clearing involves components that handle route planning (e.g.

, clear the rst oor, then the second, etc.), specify what to do on hostile contact, and include doctrinal approaches to many subtasks within the domain. Space limitations preclude detailing a complete building clearing agent, so instead agents involved in clearing an L-shaped hallway will be focused on clearing it.

The possible actions.
Copyright © . All rights reserved.