Understand what changes the outcome.

Which assumptions matter most to this force comparison?

Defense analysts, operations researchers, concept developers, and evaluation teams.

Land Combat Modeling

Land combat

What changes the force comparison?

Start with the forces, then examine the conditions in which they operate. Terrain and posture can change the meaning of a numerical advantage; the analytical question is which assumptions drive that difference.

Variables to examine. Force composition, relative strength, terrain, posture, and the period under study.

What to review. Compare estimates across stated assumptions. Keep the model’s source basis, intended use, and uncertainty attached to the result.

Connect the engagement to the air situation, the information available to each force, and the supply required to sustain the approach.

Air / GBAD Model

Air & air defense

How does the air picture change the operation?

Examine air activity and ground-based air defense together. Define the task, the opposing defenses, and the conditions before comparing the effects of an alternative approach.

Variables to examine. Air activity, ground-based air defense, the operating environment, and the time horizon.

What to review. Compare the implications of changing the air or defense assumptions. Keep modeled effects distinct from observed evidence.

Relate the air picture to land and maritime activity, sensing and communications, and the resources needed for repeated operations.

Naval Salvo Model

Naval combat

What changes the balance of a naval exchange?

Examine offensive firepower, defensive capacity, and staying power as a connected comparison. A force’s ability to deliver a salvo is one part of the question; its ability to absorb the exchange and continue matters too.

Variables to examine. Force composition, offensive firepower, defensive capacity, and staying-power assumptions.

What to review. Compare exchanges under declared assumptions and identify which changes most influence the estimate.

Carry the comparison into questions of air defense, sensing, ammunition expenditure, replenishment, and replacement.

C4ISR / EW State Model

Information & electronic warfare

What changes when information or communication changes?

Make the information environment part of the scenario. Examine what a force can sense, communicate, and coordinate, and how a different electronic-warfare assumption changes those conditions.

Variables to examine. Command and sensing conditions, communications, electronic warfare, and the assumptions connecting them.

What to review. Compare scenarios with different information conditions. Separate a change in the evidence available from a change in the analyst’s assumptions.

Trace the implications across land, air, maritime, and autonomous-system questions within the same operational context.

Space Effects Model

Space

What changes when space support is constrained?

Examine how the availability of space-enabled sensing, communications, and navigation shapes the wider operation. Compare coverage, capacity, and resilience assumptions and trace their implications across the other domains.

Variables to examine. Space-service coverage, available capacity, resilience, and the forces that depend on those services.

What to review. Compare scenarios with different levels of space support. Keep the assumptions and evidence behind each comparison visible.

Connect space dependencies to the information available, the ability to coordinate, and the continuity of land, air, and maritime operations.

Autonomous Model

Autonomous systems

Which system assumptions change the force design?

Define the role of autonomous systems within the force before comparing alternatives. Make behavior, human control, and communications assumptions explicit so the comparison has a clear analytical basis.

Variables to examine. Force composition, system roles and behavior, human-control assumptions, and communications dependencies.

What to review. Examine how an alternative force mix or system-behavior assumption changes the scenario, with the evidence and limits of the comparison visible.

Connect system employment to the information environment, the other model families, and sustainment and replacement requirements.

Cognitive Warfare Model

Cognitive warfare

How do perception and human factors shape the decision?

Physical capability is part of the operational picture. Examine how the information available to a force, morale, cohesion, and leadership shape the decisions within a scenario.

Variables to examine. Available information, morale and cohesion, leadership assumptions, and scenario context.

What to review. Compare alternative assumptions about information and behavior. Keep the evidence, uncertainty, and reasoning behind the comparison visible.

Place the human dimension alongside land, air, sea, cyber, space, and sustainment in the same analytical discussion.

• A defined comparison and its assumptions
• A view of the model and supporting evidence
• An explanation of the differences between alternatives

ACE brings land, C4ISR/EW, space, logistics, air and ground-based air defense, autonomous systems, cognitive warfare, and the Naval Salvo Model into one architectural view. A demonstration focuses on the models appropriate to your question; a model’s applicability is not established by a diagram alone.