1. Taking IDEAS Forward in the MOD
All slides Crown Copyright Unless Otherwise Stated
Taking IDEAS Forward in the MOD

2. MOD Ontology Based on IDEAS Used for information de-confliction
No point in duplicating effort
Provide interoperability with coalition partners
Used for information de-confliction
Provides a common semantic structure for stakeholders to map their terminology and data to
…thus providing a means to accurately share information
Provides the common dictionary for EA in MOD
MODAF can be extended using the MOD Ontology
Allows architects to work with their own terminology, but ensures that their terms are mapped onto other communities’ terms
Enabler to SOA
Possible uses specified in MOD SOA Handbook
Key uses is as mitigator between services which use different data structures and terms / dictionaries

3. Application Rationalisation
In developing an ontology such as IDEAS, patterns begin to emerge
The surprise is how few patterns there are
Many seemingly different business applications follow the same patterns
Offers opportunity for new breed of data-driven application
Trivial example (but you get the idea)
Most organisations have purchasing systems
They may also have sales systems
In the case of a bank, they have currency exchange systems
Actually, all these follow the same pattern of business
Asset exchange – sometimes it’s cash, sometimes it’s goods
Why do we need (at least) two systems for this ?

4. International Interoperability
Architectural Interoperability
Continue development of IDEAS for remaining DoDAF views
Integrate other modelling tools and repositories
Many of the MOD uses could be scaled-up to the extended coalition enterprise
Using BORO, the various international codes and terms could be rationalised and mapped onto a common, mathematical precise ontology
e.g. ADAT P3, JC3IEDM, OTH Gold, ATCISS, task lists, equipment taxonomies, etc. all de-conflicted

5. Intelligence Sharing
IDEAS lends itself well to extension in this area:
It is a four-dimensional ontology, therefore it handles complex temporal issues of change over time and identity over time (ship of Theseus problem)
Complex timelines and chains of events can be modelled
Extensional ontology – things are defined by their physical extent.
This means there is no debate about whether two things are the same.
If they occupy the same space at the same time, they’re the same thing.
Sounds trivial, but it’s surprising how few models use this approach (hence there is always information conflict)
IDEAS naming pattern allows multiple names to be assigned to a given entity – each name has a context (e.g. US names, UK names, etc.)
Multiple classification
Country X calls person Y a freedom fighter, country Z calls them a terrorist

6. A 4D Approach
It’s unlikely that an individual has just one classification throughout life…
Temporal “slices” of the individual can be named and classified
born
child UN
classified by
1976
student
Jeddah Uni
civil
engineer
Inst. Civ Eng
Terrorist
Freedom
Fighter
Ayman al-Zawahiri
Afghan
Freedom
Fighter
CIA
10/03/57

7. How is IDEAS Different ?
MOD’s IT history is littered with grand plans for data integration
Failures due to insufficient stakeholder engagement – i.e. attempting to “foist” a data architecture on unwilling parties
Failures due to inadequate analysis techniques – usually based on process modelling
Failures due to inability to properly compare different sources of information
Failures due to “MOD-Centric” approach ignoring coalition partners
IDEAS is different because:
It does not seek to impose a particular terminology, way of working, or data architecture on the users and stakeholders
It brings in the opportunity for international coalition interoperability
It fosters a “view from nowhere” approach – soft systems practitioners will be familiar with this idea
It is strongly founded in set theory, allowing it to provide a more accurate representation of real-world

8. What Makes IDEAS Different ?
The BORO Methodology -
Provides a precise, mathematical approach to comparing information
Very easy to understand, and stakeholders readily commit to use the methodology
Guaranteed to produce a correct representation, and is fully transparent at every stage – stakeholders are involved so buy-in is kept all the way through
Set Theory
Traditional data modelling is generally not founded in mathematic principles
IDEAS uses formal set theoretic tools to accurately represent the structure of real-world concepts
The Naming Pattern
Once the analysis is complete, the terminology used by the stakeholders is mapped back onto the resulting model
Enables stakeholders to continue working with their own terminology
Allows seamless integration of legacy systems