Battle Rhythm Situational Awareness and Tasking

Navy SBIR 25.2 - Topic N252-097
Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)
Pre-release 4/2/25   Opens to accept proposals 4/23/25   Closes 5/21/25 12:00pm ET
   [ View Q&A ]

N252-097 TITLE: Battle Rhythm Situational Awareness and Tasking

OUSD (R&E) CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Advanced Computing and Software;Trusted AI and Autonomy

The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws.

OBJECTIVE: Develop an integrated Artificial Intelligence or Machine Learning (AI/ML) tool for battle rhythm management by operators of theater-level command and control during complex Undersea Warfare (USW) wartime scenarios.

DESCRIPTION: Operators of theater-level command and control systems, such as the AN/UYQ-100 Undersea Warfare Decision Support System (USW-DSS), must handle both simple and complex wartime scenarios. Peace-time training and exercises often lean toward simple scenarios, leaving operators under trained to handle the complexity of battle rhythms that occur during wartime.

Daily battle rhythm events often consist of morning and evening command-level updates and synchronization meetings required to execute planned operations. In low-intensity operations, the battle rhythm may be more deliberate, with daily, weekly, and monthly working groups and boards. During high-intensity operations, the battle rhythm will naturally be accelerated, but commanders and staff may be tempted to accelerate the battle rhythm more than would be useful. Battle rhythms developed during peacetime often do not effectively provide the commander and staff with timely information to make decisions. Inappropriately accelerated battle rhythms lead to operator error and degradation in situational awareness as efforts to provide updates displaces time required to perform sufficient analysis.

The Navy seeks a tool incorporating AI/ML that will support operators through the full range of complexity seen in modern warfare. The technology sought will assist USW-DSS operators in reliably and rapidly conducting battle rhythm tasking, whether during relatively routine operations or the most complex wartime scenarios. This tool does not currently exist in commercial industry.

The desired technology will make use of the range of authoritative data available to USW-DSS, to include bathymetry, sound propagation paths, track information for United States Navy (USN), allies, threats, and any commercial vessels, and planned maneuvers for USN and allied forces. From these data, the desired technology will provide situational awareness to support appropriate battle rhythm tasking, to regularize the balance between providing updates and performing the analysis and planning required to support effective courses of action. It is envisioned that the desired technology could allow machine learning to support a battle rhythm that is responsive to conflict complexity without overwhelming staff to the detriment of force effectiveness. The tool will support situation awareness, enable battle rhythm tasking, and provide a user interface to facilitate these capabilities. Finally, the tool will need to be compliant with existing information assurance (IA) and other cybersecurity requirements.

The Navy is not aware of existing commercial products that can be used to perform the requested battle tempo management support across complex, war-time scenarios, given the need to use authoritative data at multiple classification levels in a manner that complies with existing IA and other cybersecurity requirements.

Work produced in Phase II may become classified. Note: The prospective contractor(s) must be U.S. owned and operated with no foreign influence as defined by 32 U.S.C. § 2004.20 et seq., National Industrial Security Program Executive Agent and Operating Manual, unless acceptable mitigating procedures can and have been implemented and approved by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) formerly Defense Security Service (DSS). The selected contractor must be able to acquire and maintain a secret level facility and Personnel Security Clearances. This will allow contractor personnel to perform on advanced phases of this project as set forth by DCSA and NAVSEA in order to gain access to classified information pertaining to the national defense of the United States and its allies; this will be an inherent requirement. The selected company will be required to safeguard classified material during the advanced phases of this contract IAW the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM), which can be found at Title 32, Part 2004.20 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

PHASE I: Develop a concept for a battle rhythm tool that meets the requirements as stated in the Description section above. Demonstrate the feasibility of the concept in meeting Navy needs and will establish that the concept can be feasibly produced by sample testing, modeling and simulation and or analysis. The Phase I Option, if exercised, will include the initial design specifications and capabilities description to build a prototype solution in Phase II.

PHASE II: Develop, demonstrate, and deliver a prototype battle rhythm tool and conduct a series of user designed sprints with fleet operators to refine the prototype for evaluation. The prototype will be evaluated to determine its capability in meeting the defined performance goals System performance will be demonstrated through installation and prototype testing using the cloud-based USW-DSS prototyping infrastructure provided by the government

It is probable that the work under this effort will be classified under Phase II (see Description section for details).

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Support the Navy in transitioning the battle rhythm tool to operational builds of USW-DSS provided to Fleet operators. Finalize the software design and algorithm prototype for evaluation to determine its effectiveness in an operationally relevant environment. Support the Navy for test and validation in accordance with the IWS 5.0 USW-DSS Peer Review Group.

The technology will have additional commercialization potential for other military command structures and civilian disaster-response and emergency management organizations.

REFERENCES:

  1. Prescott, Matthew. "Improving the Battle Rhythm to Operate at the Speed of Relevance." Joint Force Quarterly 102, National Defense University Press, July 1, 2021. https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/2679728/improving-the-battle-rhythm-to-operate-at-the-speed-of-relevance/
  2. "AN/UYQ-100 Undersea Warfare Decision Support System (USW-DSS), Last updated 20 Sep 2021." Navy Fact File. https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2166791/anuyq-100-undersea-warfare-decision-support-system-usw-dss/
  3. "Department of Defense (DoD) Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide (SRG)." Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), 21 Jun 2024. https://dl.dod.cyber.mil/wp-content/uploads/stigs/zip/U_Cloud_Computing_Y24M07_SRG.zip
  4. "National Industrial Security Program Executive Agent and Operating Manual (NISP), 32 U.S.C. § 2004.20 et seq. (1993)." https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-32/subtitle-B/chapter-XX/part-2004

KEYWORDS: AN/UYQ-100 Undersea Warfare Decision Support System; complex wartime scenarios; battle rhythm; artificial intelligence or machine learning (AI/ML); effective courses of action.

** TOPIC NOTICE **

The Navy Topic above is an "unofficial" copy from the Navy Topics in the DoD 25.2 SBIR BAA. Please see the official DoD Topic website at www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/solicitation-documents/active-solicitations for any updates.

The DoD issued its Navy 25.2 SBIR Topics pre-release on April 2, 2025 which opens to receive proposals on April 23, 2025, and closes May 21, 2025 (12:00pm ET).

Direct Contact with Topic Authors: During the pre-release period (April 2, 2025, through April 22, 2025) proposing firms have an opportunity to directly contact the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to ask technical questions about the specific BAA topic. The TPOC contact information is listed in each topic description. Once DoD begins accepting proposals on April 23, 2025 no further direct contact between proposers and topic authors is allowed unless the Topic Author is responding to a question submitted during the Pre-release period.

DoD On-line Q&A System: After the pre-release period, until May 7, 2025, at 12:00 PM ET, proposers may submit written questions through the DoD On-line Topic Q&A at https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/login/ by logging in and following instructions. In the Topic Q&A system, the questioner and respondent remain anonymous but all questions and answers are posted for general viewing.

DoD Topics Search Tool: Visit the DoD Topic Search Tool at www.dodsbirsttr.mil/topics-app/ to find topics by keyword across all DoD Components participating in this BAA.

Help: If you have general questions about the DoD SBIR program, please contact the DoD SBIR Help Desk via email at [email protected]

Topic Q & A

4/22/25  Q.
  1. What does “appropriate battle rhythm tasking” look like operationally — e.g., meeting scheduling, cognitive bandwidth forecasting, or something else?
  2. To what extent should the proposed system interact with existing tools like USW-DSS or GCCS-M?
  3. Is integration of cognitive fatigue indicators or emotional intelligence features seen as valuable?
  4. Would the Navy support Phase I engagement with fleet operators for sprint planning or interviews?
  5. Are there preferred formats or data standards we should anticipate for Phase II deliverables?
   A.
  1. Fleet users have a large number of tasks that they must accomplish using USW DSS. The system includes a large number of tools which enable these tasks by providing specific system functionality. The battle rhythm may involve accomplishing tasks on a recurring basis, knowing which tools to use to accomplish which goals, and to ensure decision makers are informed and provided appropriate information as expected. As operations become more intense, adherence to battle rhythm discipline becomes even more important and aids that support operators in managing this intensifying workload can provide structure, organization, and support to operators while executing this critical tasking.
  2. It is not necessary for the proposed system to have specific interactions or tie ins with USW DSS or the various services on the system. Should such integrations prove valuable to supporting operators in battle rhythm management, they would be considered in-bounds for this proposal.
  3. A novel use of cognitive fatigue indicators or emotional intelligence features could be valuable provided it leads to more efficient operators which are better able to manage the recurring and non-recurring tasks of the USW battle rhythm on USW DSS.
  4. No, however some interaction with system subject matter experts would be available during Phase I performers.
  5. None are identified at this time. Performers working on Phase II deliverables will be able to further discuss this with system subject matter experts.
4/21/25  Q.
  1. Are there specific battle rhythm task types or operational decision points (e.g., targeting updates, synchronization meetings) that should be emphasized for modeling or automation in Phase I?
  2. Will representative or synthetic battle rhythm logs, event sequences, or command decision artifacts be made available for training and testing during Phase I?
  3. Are there existing ontologies or structured data formats within the USW-DSS environment that the battle rhythm tool should align with during initial concept development?
  4. Is there a preferred cloud or virtualized prototyping environment required for Phase I development, or is the government’s cloud-based DSS infrastructure only used in Phase II?
  5. Should the AI/ML system prioritize historical pattern modeling, real-time prediction, or dynamic scheduling adjustment—or is a combination expected by Phase I?
  6. Are there specific human-machine teaming or user interface requirements envisioned in Phase I to support operator trust, decision traceability, or task confirmation?
  7. Will the system need to support multiple classification levels (e.g., SIPR/NIPR or JWICS) simultaneously in Phase I, or will that become a requirement during later transition?
  8. Is the government envisioning this capability as an operator-facing decision support aid, or will it also interface with automated C2 tools and operational systems for direct task execution?
   A.
  1. Steps in the fires process, the general situation accessing the position of submarines, managing the broadcast cycle, doing analytics about red forces, doing METOC environmental updates, etc. for current operations going on, what does the USW DSS operator need to do.
  2. No, much of this information is TUSWOC planning and workflows, that will not be available during Phase I due to classification.
  3. None are identified at this time. Performers working on Phase II deliverables will be able to further discuss this with system subject matter experts.
  4. The USW DSS environment web tools run in JBOSS. We utilize other tools such as Bitbucket, Nexus, Jenkins. Utilizing the governments cloud based DSS Infrastructure would be best suited in Phase II.
  5. There is no specific expectation of these AI/ML methods being used. With the goal of aiding operators in managing the complex operational task environment with the USW DSS system battle rhythm, AI/ML tools are a possible tools which can be used to aid operators in efficiently executing recurring and non-recurring tasking. Historical patterns, prediction, and dynamic scheduling could support this when paired with static recurring scheduled tasking that occurs on intervals.
  6. No. Specifics related to human-machine teaming, user interface options related to operator trust, decision traceability or task confirmation are not an expectation. That said, there are many activities performed by US Navy operators where decision traceability, sign-offs, or other authorizations are a part of battle rhythm workflows in USW DSS and similar systems.
  7. Phase I will only involve data at the CUI level - so access to SIPR/JWICS is not required.
  8. The tool is envisioned to support operators with battle rhythm situational awareness and tasking - it is anticipated that operators will see and interact directly with this tool to manage the various recurring and non-recurring tasks that are a part of normal USW operations using the many complex systems integrated into the USW DSS platform. In addition to supporting operators in task management, the proposed tool could support operators through task execution support.
4/20/25  Q.
  1. What specific types of authoritative data available to the AN/UYQ-100 USW-DSS should the tool prioritize for integration, and are there preferred formats or access protocols for these data sources? For example, should the tool focus on specific data like bathymetry, sound propagation paths, or track information, and are there standardized formats or APIs for accessing these within USW-DSS?
  2. Can you clarify the desired balance between automation and operator control in the battle rhythm tool’s tasking and situational awareness functions? Should the tool autonomously recommend battle rhythm adjustments and courses of action, or should it primarily provide decision-support insights for operators to act upon?
  3. What are the key performance metrics for evaluating the tool’s effectiveness across low-intensity and high-intensity wartime scenarios? Are there specific targets for situational awareness accuracy, tasking response time, or reduction in operator errors, and how should trade-offs (e.g., speed vs. accuracy) be prioritized?
  4. Are there specific cybersecurity or information assurance (IA) requirements that the tool must comply with when integrating with USW-DSS, particularly regarding classified data handling? Does the tool need to adhere to specific DoD standards (e.g., Cloud Computing SRG) or encryption protocols to ensure secure operation in a classified environment?
  5. What are the operational constraints for deploying the tool in the USW-DSS environment, such as computational resources, latency, or user interface preferences? Are there limitations on processing power (e.g., cloud-based vs. on-premises), real-time performance requirements, or preferences for the user interface to support fleet operators?
  6. Who are the anticipated end users for this technology once it has been developed and tested?
   A.
  1. USW DSS does have each of those types of data which can be accessed via API internally. Existing tools also compute sensor performance predictions, calculate search effectiveness, manage a contact/track picture, plan and allocate waterspace, and share tactically-relevant information.
  2. Both are valid goals, but the objective is weighted more towards the former. That is, managing, executing, and adjusting the battle rhythm itself rather than providing new tactical decision support analytics such as sensor effectiveness computation or red force COA prediction.
  3. The program does not have a measured baseline for the effectiveness of its situational awareness that can easily be used for comparison. The most informative measures would be assessment of overall time to execute steps of the battle rhythm vs. the volume of blue and red forces involved in the scenario. e.g. Given a high volume of required actions/decisions, does this tool prevent things from falling through the cracks?
  4. Yes - the USW DSS system applies DISA's Security Technical Implementation Guides, and is accredited to operate at the secret level for general TUSWC installations, as well as the TS level for certain waterspace planning activities. Much of the basic infrastructure such as a network proxy or encrypted HTTPS communications is provided within the USW DSS system.
  5. The system typically runs in an on-prem hosting server. Live data feeds are processed by the system, but not in a "Real-Time" OS type of way. The system's preferred user interface for new features is web-based interfaces. The USW DSS system has a web interface framework (the "Extension Scaffold") to host and display web-based interfaces.
  6. The anticipated end user for this technology would be the USW DSS operators, typically those at the Theater USW Operations Centers.


[ Return ]