Karl Gunzelman

Follower

Following

Public Views

Ted Meyer

George Mason University

Mary Mcdonald

Chris Nannini

Ian Lustick

University of Pennsylvania

Matthew Koehler

George Mason University

Matt Koehler

Dan Madden

Warren Lerner

Capitol Technology University

Anthony Dekker

Daniel Stimpson

Interests

Uploads

Papers by Karl Gunzelman

Team 6: Utility of Distillation Modeling for Countering IEDs

from Scythe : Proceedings and Bulletin of the International Data Farming Community, Issue 7 Works... more

Download

A Training-Task Paradigm to Meet the Operational and Training Needs of the Future Army

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the view... more

Download

Transformation: growing role of sensor networks in defense applications

Advanced Signal Processing Algorithms, Architectures, and Implementations XIII, 2003

The Department of Defense (DoD) is undergoing a transformation. What began as theoretical thinkin... more The Department of Defense (DoD) is undergoing a transformation. What began as theoretical thinking, under the notion of a Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) is now beginning to manifest itself in a &quot;Transformation.&quot; The overall goal of the transformation described in Joint Vision 2020 is the creation of a force that is dominant across the full spectrum of military operations.

Soldier-machine interface for the army future combat system: literature review, requirements, and emerging design principles

Team 10: Peace Support Operations Model

As the focus of the United States military shifts from conventional warfare toward irregular warf... more As the focus of the United States military shifts from conventional warfare toward irregular warfare, interest has grown in the development of models that can simulate social behavior as it pertains to military operations. The contemporary operating environment, as reflected in Iraq and Afghanistan, shows the critical role the population portrays in modern combat. Populations, whether broken into smaller social groups, granulated into individuals, or studied as an aggregate of social groups, are often the determinate of success in modern combat. Therefore, the military’s interest in modeling social cognition has grown out of necessity. The military uses models for course of action analysis, training and rehearsal, and evaluation for acquisition. If these models are not indicative of contemporary operations, they are not only lacking in utility, but are potentially harmful. One new model which combines conventional warfare with the modern focus on the population is the Peace Support ...

Download

From TFS to Kalt: Evolution of Military Learning

Military Review, Nov 1, 2000

Learners will need to build knowledge proactively. Heimstra believes more research is needed to d... more Learners will need to build knowledge proactively. Heimstra believes more research is needed to determine better ways of incorporating computer technology and electronic communication into self-directed learning as more distance education programs are created. POWERFUL INFORMATION technologies are dramatically improving today's Army. In virtually every sphere, technologies unheard of a few years ago now promise to revolutionize diverse operations. One area that information technology systems have already significantly affected is training. More than ever before, information technology systems are forging and refining soldiers' battlefield skills, changing the face of Army training. From new software at the heart of the Standard Army Training System (SATS) to complex instrumentation systems at the combat training centers, new information technologies are producing soldiers with skills to dominate operations across the spectrum of conflict. High-tech training devices and simulations are here to stay. The information technologies that they embody determine how and where the Army trains, dramatically improve the commander's ability to plan and manage training, and provide leverage that improves training effectiveness. As with all revolutions, maximizing information technology's benefits depends on the initiative and determination of the user--applications developed in a laboratory are not necessarily as effective as those developed in the field. This article shares the story of how one small technology-related training improvement was developed and applied in the field, how it might have been applied to today's institutional training pillar and how it might be changed to meet the Army's future needs. It started at the Combat Maneuver Training Center (CMTC), Hohenfels, Germany, where trainers searched for ways to better manage unit training and the training feedback process. Origins of the Training Feedback System During an autumn 1994 rotation at the CMTC, the Army Research Institute (ARI) demonstrated an electronic clipboard system (ECS) for collecting performance data on units undergoing training and providing better feedback to commanders. The new system was complex, cumbersome to assemble and, once booted, forced users to crawl through bewildering, information-laden screens. The ECS was a good idea but was not much help and ended up stowed in a wall locker. What the CMTC team really needed was a simple, user-friendly program to liberate the center's overworked observer/controllers (O/Cs) from the cumbersome, manual methods of recording observations on note cards and the time-consuming drill required to translate these observations into feedback for commanders. O/C Feedback O/Cs' primary mission is to provide useful feedback to individuals and units training at the center. Feedback is provided in two forms: after-action reviews (AAR) and mission or battle summaries. In the field, an AAR can take various forms--from an informal backbrief on butcherpaper charts to scaled replications of the unit and battle, such as a sand table. Once the unit has completed the training, a formal, fully instrumented AAR in the center's training analysis facility (TAF) is typically conducted. This AAR makes full use of the TAF's simulation technologies, voice- and datacapturing capabilities and high-resolution graphics. The mission or battle summary takes one to two pages for each battle. Done correctly, a mission or battle summary identifies and articulates deficiencies within each of the battlefield operating systems (BOS) by phase (planning, preparation or execution) for each mission. These summaries are key parts of the unit's take-home package that commanders and operations officers use to assess mission-essential task list (METL) training deficiencies, overall unit readiness and create a training plan that will address shortfalls. Ideally, the unit receives its take-home package before departing the training center. …

Team 6: Utility of Distillation Modeling for Countering IEDs

from Scythe : Proceedings and Bulletin of the International Data Farming Community, Issue 7 Works... more

Download

A Training-Task Paradigm to Meet the Operational and Training Needs of the Future Army

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the view... more

Download

Transformation: growing role of sensor networks in defense applications

Advanced Signal Processing Algorithms, Architectures, and Implementations XIII, 2003

Soldier-machine interface for the army future combat system: literature review, requirements, and emerging design principles

Team 10: Peace Support Operations Model

Download

From TFS to Kalt: Evolution of Military Learning

Military Review, Nov 1, 2000

Karl Gunzelman

Related Authors

Uploads

Papers by Karl Gunzelman

Log In