Page 48 - Federal Computer Week, July 2019

FCWIdeas
Can data-rich wargames improve decisions?
Researchers have developed a cloud-based, multiplayer game to analyze how human behavior affects conflicts between countries
BY PATRICK MARSHALL
Military strategists have long relied
on wargames to gain insight into
how human decision-making might impact a tense confrontation or actual conflict. However, the current genera- tion of wargames — in which a small number of military and political offi- cials conduct table-top exercises — are so limited in scope that analysts don’t get much more information than they might from watching a game of “Risk.”
“Because you have a limited player set and only play through a few sce- narios, you don’t get enough data from these scenario-based discus- sions to draw statistical inference. You may only get an idea of how these specific people would react,” said Bethany Goldblum, a researcher in the University of California, Berke- ley’s Department of Nuclear Engineer- ing. “This is why traditional wargam- ing is often described as an art rather than science.”
“Signal,” however, is a new cloud- based, multiplayer game designed to collect decision-making data from a much broader set of players. It runs on Amazon’s cloud platform and
uses state-of-the-art game engines to deliver a more realistic experience
for participants. It was funded by the Carnegie Corp. and developed by researchers at the Lawrence Liver- more and Sandia national laboratories along with a team from Berkeley that included members of the departments of Electrical Engineering and Com- puter Sciences, Nuclear Engineering, Political Science, and the Goldman School of Public Policy.
In addition to amassing data from choices made in thousands of games
by a variety of players, “Signal” also collects basic demographic data about participants to aid in analyzing decision-making behaviors.
“Traditional discussion-based exercises have led to a theory-rich but data-poor environment,” said Andrew Reddie, a team member and Ph.D. candidate in Berkeley’s Department of Political Science. “Using new tools, we’re arguing that board games and
or launch a cyber or nuclear attack and then negotiate trades and agree- ments with other players to deter attacks in an escalating conflict. The game tracks every move players make and their communications with one another through online chat logs.
Players’ scores are updated throughout the game so they can see the impact of their decisions. And the game’s pre- and post-game surveys collect basic demographic data about the players that includes age, educa- tion, political affiliation, work experi- ence and knowledge about national security issues.
“We do not collect information beyond basic demographic data used in most social science experiments,” Reddie told GCN. “There are no psychometric or alternative testing procedures in ‘Signal.’”
The data collected is anonymized and can be used to help machine learning algorithms create models
of optimal behavior under certain experimental conditions, according to the team. “By tracking demographic data and automatically collecting player and game data in real time, the platform allows for quantitative analy- sis of the game outcomes,” Goldblum said.
“‘Signal’ offers a first attempt to
use experimental gaming to ask and answer social science questions relat- ed to international security issues,” Reddie said. He added that the team plans to test the differences in game play when the number of players is increased or decreased and generate additional scenarios, such as the intro- duction of drones and other emerging technologies. n
48
July 2019 FCW.COM
electronic games can complement traditional wargaming by providing a science-based, experimental frame- work for gathering data.”
The premise of “Signal” is simple: Each player controls a hypothetical country and tries to increase that country’s influence by forging allianc- es and making decisions about cyber, conventional and nuclear capabili- ties, including investments in infra- structure and military resources. The research question being asked is: How does the introduction of different weapon capabilities affect escalation or de-escalation during conflict?
Players “signal” their intent to build up civilian and military infrastructure