3.9 Article

Experimental Wargaming with SIGNAL

期刊

MILITARY OPERATIONS RESEARCH
卷 27, 期 2, 页码 59-82

出版社

MILITARY OPERATIONS RESEARCH SOC
DOI: 10.5711/1082598327259

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration [DE-NA0003525]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wargames are a valuable tool in military and strategic research, but traditional approaches may lack rigorous data collection. Experimental wargaming, such as the SIGNAL game, combines experimental design principles to explore fundamental research questions about human behavior in conflict scenarios. SIGNAL has been played hundreds of times by thousands of players, creating a substantial database for academic purposes.
Wargames are a common tool for investigating complex conflict scenarios and have a long history of informing military and strategic study. Historically, these games have often been one offs, may not rigorously collect data, and have been built primarily for exploration rather than developing datadriven analytical conclusions. Experimental wargaming, a new wargaming approach that employs the basic principles of experimental design to facilitate an objective basis for exploring fundamental research questions around human behavior (such as understanding conflict escalation), is a potential tool that can be used in combination with existing wargaming approaches. The Project on Nuclear Gaming, a consortium involving the University of California, Berkeley, Sandia National Laboratories, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, developed an experimental wargame, SIGNAL, to explore questions surrounding conflict escalation and strategic stability in the nuclear context. To date, the SIGNAL experimental wargame has been played hundreds of times by thousands of players from around the world, creating the largest data base of wargame data for academic purposes known to the authors. This paper discusses the design of SIGNAL, focusing on how the principles of experimental design influenced this design.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据