Browsing by Author "Ringrose, Trevor"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access COMBAT SIMULATION - TWO SIDES.xls(Cranfield University, 2016-05-25 09:51) Boutselis, Petros; Ringrose, TrevorThe data are the outputs of the simulation of a closed-loop, two-sides (Blue vs Red) combat model saved in an Excel spreadsheet. The 1st tab has the input data while the other two tabs have the outputs for the Blue and for the Red. Each column in the Input tab is a design point randomly selected (250 in total). The first two rows represent the number of tanks and recce of the Blue, while rows 3 and 4 represent the respective Red. The 5th row represents the probability of shock that has been applied the same to both sides. Rows 6, 7 and 8 represent the percentage Unit participation of Tanks, Machine Guns and Anti-tanks respectively. These last three variables also apply equally to both Blue and Red. The model used (SIMBAT) is stochastic and therefore each design point was run 40 times, taking care to use the same random numbers for each point (Common Random Numbers) Therefore each of the 250 columns in the two output tabs has 40 rows. The data have been used in: P. Boutselis, Trevor J. Ringrose GAMLSS and neural networks in combat simulation metamodelling: A case study. Expert Syst. Appl. 40(15): 6087-6093 (2013), doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2013.05.023 to produce two different metamodels: a statistical model (GAMLSS) and a neural network (ANN), while recently the same data have been used to produce a Bayesian Network.Item Open Access An experimental intervention to investigate user perceptions of computer versus manual board wargame(SAGE, 2023-01-01) Smith, Jeremy D.; Ringrose, Trevor; Barker, StephenAnalysis of the literature related to wargaming identifies a requirement for the perception of immersion and engagement in wargaming. The references generally indicate that the computer is less able to facilitate collective engagement than a manual system; however, there is as yet little empirical evidence to support this. There are also suggestions that players perceive manual games differently to a computer wargame. An experiment, derived from the previous analysis, was performed to address the research question: Is there a discernible difference between the levels of players’ engagement in computer wargames versus manual wargames? The experiment provides empirical evidence that there is a difference in players’ engagement with a computer wargame compared to a manual game, in particular with the manual game providing greater engagement with other players. Hence, if engagement between players is to be encouraged and regarded as an important aspect of a wargame for defense applications, then this provides evidence that the manual approach can indeed be better.